Church of Scientology Judicial Review

Home , Cadet Org, Catherine Picard, Celebrity Centres, Criminon, Ford Greene, Fort Harrison Hotel

HO.ME OFFICE

- Feu 03 0001/0029/003/

-.." RELATED PAPERS FILE BEGINS: __ __ ENDS:

FILE TITLE: - :

POLICY (REVIEW AFTER 25 YEARS)

CULTS I NEW RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS s:

. '- CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY JUDICIAL REVIEW

SEND TO I DATE - SEND TO DATE SEND TO -- DATE . ZO,3 -. , - -- 0 0 - -- 0 . 0 - " -0 . 0 0 -- 0 HOF000647241 ese

8111 .. .. --- _ .. ------_. . , - AnnexA Press Office to take

Subject: Judicial Review Case: Recognition of Scientology as a religion in prison

Tuesday 21 October - permissions hearing for a judicial review on HRA grounds of Prison Service policy not to recognise Scientology as a religion for the purpose of facilitating religious ministry in prisons.

Background

Prisoner Roger Charles Heaton and the Church of Scientology have made an application for jUdicial review of this policy.

Unes to take

The applicants, having seen our witness statement and outline argument, have offered to withdraw their case, with no order as to costs. This means that the non-recognition policy being followed by prison service is reasonable .and secure.

It has been our long-standing policy to withhold recognition of scientology as a religion. However, in order to meet the needs of individual prisoners, the Prison Service allows any prisoner registered as a Scientologist to have access to a representative of the Church of Scientology if he wishes to receive its ministry. This is the approach which was followed in the case of Mr Heaton.

The Home Office considers that its policy respects the rights of Mr Heaton under the ECHR and is reasonable in view of concerns of which the department is aware about some of the practices of the Church.

Ifasked

Q: Does the Prison Service's policy in fact grant recognition in practice?

A: We do not accept that interpretation - we have granted access but not recognition Annex B

Where did Scientology come from?

The source and founder the Scientology belief is L. Ron Hubbard, who devoted his life to finding answers to questions that have troubled mankind throughout time. In 1950 Hubbard publisbed 'Dianetics: The Modern Science of . Mental Health' which quickly gained interest through its claim to be the 'common peoples science of life and betterment'. Hubbard's response to the popularity of his work was to add a more religious and spiritual aspect to Dianetics thereby creating Scientology in the early 1950s as 'an applied religious philosophy and technology'. The Church of Scientology was founded in 1954 and is the main organisation responsible for promoting and marketing the philosophy and spiritual programme ofScientology.

What is Scientology?

The word Scientology literally means "knowing how to know". Scientology itself is defined as "the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other self'. Hubbard claimed to have discovered the conditions which either promote the soul's (or Thetan's) survival and realisation of full potential or make it succumb and wither. It is these principles that Scientologists use to directly encourage awareness and ability to overcome the negative factors that impair their 'spiritual being'. Scientology is a combination of training the mind and of applying the gains in self-understanding and effectiveness to everyday life. It claims to be a religion because it emphasises the spiritual nature of humans and the immortal of the soul. There are Ministers of Scientology, prayers, Sunday Services and rites of passage. However, the majority of members choose only to attend courses and counselling which instruct and train members in the principles of Scientology.

Practices

'Auditing' is the process whereby Scientology train themselves to respond to probing questions about their past life without losing their composure,thereby demonstrating that the Theten can eventually 'go clear' of the physical world and become 'at cause' in any situation, Le. it can accept total responsibility for its own actions.

Further courses of counselling and training, at progressively higher levels and prices, are designed to cultivate even more elevated spiritual states. The enhanced sense inner potential is supposed to lead to greater success in whatever the trained Scientology chooses to do. Criticisms

Serious concerns have been raised about the operation of the Church of Scientology. The practice of charging fees which escalate sharply with the ascending levels of training, often resulting in members incurring large debts, is a source of particular criticism. Some former staff members have also complained about high levels of psycholoqicat pressure on them to work excessively hard for little or no payment. Others have said that personal information they disclosed during auditing sessions was later used by the Church to blackmail them. The .alleged harassment of former members is also a common complaint and the organisation's hostility to psychiatry led to complaints of neglect. Some of these allegations are also made about the activities of other cult organisations. But of the number of complaints and concerns made to the Home Office (and INFORM) about cults, Scientology usually features near the top of the list (thought the actual numbers remain small).

Although the allegations against Scientology tend to have similarities world-wide, the difficulty lies in obtaining supporting evidence to sustain them. In the UK there have been one or two notable cases where legal proceedings against the organisation - most recently for libel - have been successful. There have been a few other successful cases in the United States and Europe, but Scientology has won many of the legal.battles in which it has been engaged and has succeeded . in overturning a numberof decisions which have gone against it. Scientology's

A search on the internet produces many horror stories of Scientology and the effect it has had on families. This includes allegations of brainwashing, break up and exploitation. However many of these stories are some years old, and the Scientologists do appear to have cleaned up their act significantly:

It is thought that one reason that the Church of Scientology did not appeal against the decision of the Charity Commissioners is because the case would have been very public, and many people who felt they had suffered would have come forward.

UK and international position

The UK has no definition of what constitutes a religion. We have tended to take the line that Scientologists, along with members of other minority religions, are free to follow their own practices and beliefs provided they remain within the law.

The Charity Commission refused registration as a charity (in 1999) on the grounds that it is not a religion for the purposes of charity law as they (the Commissioners) did not accept that the practices of auditing and training constituted "worship". And that the public benefit had not been established and could not be presumed.

Scientology though is accepted as a religion in many countries. In Australia the for the Governmentcfeftnition of a religion (according to charity law) was a court case involving Scientology. This led to the following recommendation:

That the definition of religion be based on principles established in the Scientology case, namely:

beliefin supernatural Being, Thing or Principle; and

acceptance and observance of canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief.

In the US, Scientology has been recognised as a religion under charity law since 1993. This followed an extensive examination under the Internal Revenue Code.

France and some states in Germany have passed laws that make it impossible for a person to be a Scientology and a public servant. Note on the Government's approach to Scientology INO

/NO does not recognise Scientology as a religion for the purposes of Immigration Rules. In practice this means that there is no prohibition on Scientologists entering the UK in one capacity or another under the Rules e.g. as a student or visitor and fo/iowing the doctrines of belief whilst here. But persons connected with the organisation are not recognised as "ministers of religion" and do not therefore qualify for admission under the specific category of the Rules that enables such .persons to enter for permit-free employment as ministers of religion, missionaries or members of a religious order.

This has been INO's position for quite some time and derives from the 1970 Court of Appeal judgement in ex parte Segerdal that held that scientology chapels did not constitute places of religious worship under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1955. This was because the ceremonies carried out in the building were focused not on prayer to a Supreme Being but on instruction in a philosophy concerned with man.

INO have also taken note of the more recent decision of the Charity Commissioners not to grant charitable status on the grounds that they did not agree that Scientology had been established "for the advancement of religion".

Charites

The Charities Unit are taking forward amendments to the Charity Law which refer to the category of 'religious charities' (the public benefit aspect of the law will remain as it is). The unit do not expect that the amendments will alter the previous decision of the Charity Commission in 1999 and that Scientology would still be refused recognition as a charity on these grounds. Furthermore, if the Church were to win the judicial review, the unit think that this will make no difference to the Charity Law and any future decisions made towards the church - this is because the definition of religion and public benefit are for the purposes of Charity Law only.

Charities Commission

The issue of whether the Church of Scientology was a religion within the meaning of charity law was only an aspect of the decision not to recognise the Church as a charity. Other aspects of the decision was that it was not shown to be established for the public benefit which is the other criterion which would need to be established for it to be accepted as a charity.

If Church was successful in its recognition of religious ministry within the HM prisons, this would not in itself have a direct effect on whether Scientology could be regarded as a religion within the meaning of charity law (as there are specific criteria which need to be filled which may not be the same as that for the Prison Service) or on the issue of public benefit (which again is supported by particular criteria). However the matterwould not be totally irrelevant. Charity law should broadly follow affect the common understanding of society both about the. meaning of religion or anything else and where social change and recognition is apparent charity law does recognise that it does need to develop and € interpreted in line with contemporary understandings. It would therefore be considered as a factor in considerations, however that does not necessarily mean thatthe resultwould necessarily be any different. .

.At this stagethe commission can not see that a successful decision in favour of Church would havea bearing on otherareas of theirwork.

Other Government Departments

• DfES

This Deptdoes not havea stance on whether scientology should be accepted as a religion.

With respect to Religious Education , the regulations state that locally agreed syllabuses for maintained schools must reflect the fact that religious traditions in the country are in the main Christian whilst taking account of the teaching and practices of other principal religions. Although the regulations do not state what these religions are, traditionally they are taken as being Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism. However, it is up to the head teacher and governing body which other faiths and belief groups pupils will cover as part of the RE syllabus.

As far as DfES can say there are currently independent schools that are described as usingthe teaching method devised by L Ron Hubbard but only one is owned by the Church of Scientology.

DfES haverecently introduced regulations to allow independent schools to apply for an order made by the SOS designating them as a school with a religious character. This will allow such independent schools to discriminate in favour of teaching staffwith the same religious beliefas the school. DfES do not intend to determine what is or is not a religion when we receive these applications and have no prescriptive list of acceptable religious bodies. An order will be made if the supporting evidence seems in order. . . . It is already possible for any group to propose to establish a maintained school with a religious character. For a scientology school to be considered for designation as a faith school,it would first be necessary for scientology to recognised as a faith - which has not been the case.

• DWP

Jobcentre Plus has a long standing policy of refusing to accept vacancies from the Church of Scientology or any of its subsidiary organisations. This policy was based on judgements made in the law courts in 1984 where the church was described as immoral and socially obnoxious" and that "it is corrupt, sinister and dangerous". Bryan Nicholson the then chairman of the ·Manpower Service Commission (MSC) which was responsible for the public employment services stated at that time "that there are unjustifiable risks in introducing jobseekers to such an organisation and that it is not in the public interest to take these risks". It should be stressed that this policy applies to the Church and its subsidiary organisations and not to individual followers or believers in its philosophy.

Further developments, however, had bearing on the effectiveness of this policy.

Jobcentres were asked to display vacancies, which involve the work of the Church, by third parties or private agencies. One example of this was a leaflet distribution agency which asked Jobcentres to display vacancies for leaflet distributors. It emerged that the leaflet to be distributed was a promotional leaflet advertising the works of the founder of the Church, L. Ron Hubbard. . -

The revised Jobcentre Plus policy is that Jobcentres:

• will not accept vacancies from the Church of Scientology or any of its subsidiary organisations;

• Will not accept vacancies from third parties or private agencies which involve carrying out the work of the Church or any of its subsidiary organisations; and. • will not accept vacancies where applicants or workers are required or contractually bound to follow, or be subject to, the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard or the Church of Scientology. In these circumstances it is unlikely that Jobcentre Plus would be aware when taking a vacancy from an employer that such a requirement exists - it is more likely that this might be raised as the resuIt of- a. . jobseeker complaint. Where CCs or Jobcentres/Jobcentre Plus Offices are made aware, by jobseekers or from other sources, that a vacancy involves the work of the Church of Scientology or that employees are required to follow the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard or the Church, the employer should be contacted immediately and asked to respond to the allegation. If the employer confirms that the vacancy involves the work of the Church or that workers are required to follow the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard or the Church, it should be suspended immediately and the employer advised that Jobcentre Plus does not handle vacancies which involve the work or teachings of the Church. The Employer Policy Unit in Head Office in Sheffield should be advised immediately of any decision to refuse a vacancy on these grounds.

If employers challenge the decision they should be referred to the Employer Policy Unit in Head Office in Sheffield.

Where the employer denies that the vacancy involves the work or teachings of the Church they should be asked confirm this in writing. This information should be recorded in the Conversations box in the employer record on LMS. The Employer Policy Unit in Head Office in Sheffield should be sent copies of the complaint and the written response from the employer. 1985 WL 312270 Page I

Band G (Minors) (Custody), Re (CA) Court ofAppeal c.1985

Where Reponed

Summary

Cases Cited

History ofthe Case

Where Reported

[1985] Fam. Law 127

Summary

Subject: Family law

Keywords: Minors; Parents; Religions; Wardship

Catchphrases: Wardship; scientology movement; considerations; appeal

Abstract: The wards were a boy aged ten a girl aged eight. Their parents were scientologists. In 1979 a decree nisi was granted and, by consent, F was awarded custody ofthe children. In 1981 M and the stepfather resiled from scientology. In 1982, after a period of access, M kept the children and took them to the USA. F located her whereabouts and the children returned F to England. In July 1984 the custody hearing before Latey, J. lasted for three weeks. M adduced substantial based on scientology's own documents and contended that if the children were brought up they would be seriously damaged. F submitted that the status quo offive-and-a-half years should remain undisturbed . He also sought to assure the judge that he would not involve the children in scientology until they were old enough to decide for themselves. He did not adduce any general on . scientology nor did the "Church" take part in the proceedings. refused to accept F's assurances and held that it was not in the children's est interests to e to scientology and that this fact tipped the scales in favour of M having care and control. F appealed contending inter alia, that the judge had failed to exercise his discretion judicially that his judgment had been coloured by his strong feelings and preoccupation scientology and that it was a breach of natural justice to \ make such definite finding on scientology when the "church" had not been party to.those proceedings. The Registrar to allow an application by the "church" to be joined and a party to the appeal. Summary: Held, dismissing F's appealthat by reason ofthe nature ofthe proceedings it was the interests ofthe children that the judge should not only hear evidence about scientology but should also make definitive findings upon it, otherwise he could not assess the risk to the children ifthey continued to be in contact F. In any event no application had been made for the "church" to be joined as a party and there had been no appeal against the Registrar's refusal. The judge's findings about scientology were binding only between the parties the case and formed no precedent and created no estoppe1 any other proceedings involving different persons and different issues. There was also ample evidence on which the judge had been entitled to take the view that he could not rely on F to fulfil his assurances. There no grounds for interfering the judgment (Official Solicitor v K [1965] A.C. 201 applied).

Copr. West 2003 No Claim to Orig. Govt. Works 1985 WL312270 Page 2

Cases Cited

Official Solicitorv K, [19651 A.C. 201; [196313 W.L.R. 408; [1963] 3 All E.R. 191; (1963) 107SJ. 616 (HL)

History of the Case

Direct History

Band G (Minors)(Custody), Re, [1985] Fam. Law 58

Affirmedby

and G (Minors)(Custody), Re, [] 9851 Fam. Law 127 (CA)

END OF DOCUMENT

Copr. West 2003 No.Claim to Orig. Govt. Works Dear

As requested, I am sending you a report detailing the concerns and allegations surrounding the Church of Scientology in this country andabroad, including those voiced to Inform. This is, obviously, a one-sided overview. Thequestion regarding the benefits of Scientology (including whether or not it should be regarded as a religion) has left academics divided (see, for example, Kent 1999andWilson 1995). Foran overview of the range of titlespublished aboutScientology (including Scientology), I haveattached a general bibliography.

In response to specific questions posed by I will elaborate onthe typesof auditing and the payment of course fees for members below.

Types of Auditing: Scientology distinguishes between Professional Auditing, Co-Auditing, Group Processing, and SoloAuditing. Professional Auditing is the standard technique in which a trained auditor audits a 'pre-c1ear' who is often newto scientology. See http://www.whatisscientology.org/html/part02/Chp05/pg0168.htmlfor a description from a Scientology perspective of howan auditing session is conducted. The norm is that Professional Auditing involves the auditor and the one being audited. Whenthe auditor is a trainee, an instructor mayalso be present. Theauditing may, however, take placein a larger room where several otherpeople are involved in auditing. In Co-Auditing Scientology students work in pairs andtake it in turns to audit one another. In the caseof Group Processing, Auditing is delivered by a, single auditor to a group of five or more., sometimes this mayinvolve a group of a hundred or more people. Group Processing is open to all levels. SoloAuditing, onthe other hand, can onlybe practiced by members who are higherup on 'The Bridge to Total Freedom'. The topics covered in AUditing should be treated as confidential.

Payment of course feesfor members: Clients generally haveto payfor the courses theytake. Whether Sea Org members payfor theircourses as well is a contested topic. In a 1996 Swedish courtcasea Scientologist member stated that at a certain level (IX) Sea Org members studycertain teachings as partof theirjob, andthey do not haveto payfor these auditor courses.' He stated that Scientology had never charged anybody for thesecourses, nor has it ever asked for donations for these courses (seeZenon Panoussis v. Scientology 1998). This statement started a discussion on a critical newsgroup (alt.religion.scientofogy), where the topicof conversation was whatwas referred to as the 'freeloader's debt'. According to formermembers, Scientology allows staff members to do courses with delayed payment. Upon leaving, they are presented with a bill for the payment Scientology has notyet received for courses taken. Some formermembers have saidtheyfelt trapped by the church's "freeloader debt"policy. Apparently Scientologists join the staff as a wayto obtain the church's expensive services for free. But should they leave before the expiration of theiremployment contracts -- ranging from two years to 1 billion years -- they mustpayfor thetraining they havereceived free of payment. This"freeloader's debt"can reach thousands of dollars. The representation for Scientology then admitted thereare invoices involved auditors whotake certain courses-these are a symbolic formality, not a 'real' bill. Onlythose whowish to leavethe Sea Org (according to him onlyonepercent everleaves) are expected to pay them. According to him, the ones who leave Scientology altogether, are not expected to pay these bills (Ibid.). Discussants on alt.religion.scientology strongly disagreed with the last statement, andargued that every Scientologist eventually hasto payfor the courses. OneScientology official onceexplained to methat Scientology trains its staff, and once a staff member leaves, theyshould payfor the training which hasnowequipped them to be employed elsewhere. "

1 Sea Org members are full-time members who have chosen to devote theirlivesto Sciento(ogy, andhavesigned a billion-year contract as wellas a legally binding employment contract. Inform report13/10/2003 Scientology

Examples of conflicts between the church and its opponents I former members

1995- ongoing USA. The Usa McPherson case. Usajoinedthe Church of Scientology (COS) at the age of eighteen, and had been a member for 18 yearswhenshe died in 1995at the age of 36. In November 1995shewas admitted to a hospital whereshewas diagnosed as having a psychological problem, butshe checked herselfout andleft with COS members, and subsequently checked into Fort Harrison, whereCOSruns courses. Allegedlyshewas puton the 'introspection rundown', course apparently usedfor thosemembers who are undergoing breakcowns.! On December the 5th Usa arrived at.thehospital in Clearwater; Florida, DOA, severely dehydrated (although the forensic examiner retracted this finding when a criminal casewas started against COS), and allegedly bruised and underweight.

1997: Lisa'sfamily sued COSandthe individuals involved for wrongful death. November 1998: COS was indicted on two felonycharges in the death of Usa McPherson criminal neglectand practicing medicine withouta license.

June2000: charges against COSweredropped because the medical examiner (Joan could not be counted on to testifyconfidently. There are allegations thatWood was pressurised by COS. The familyis to appeal and a newdate is to be set;the attorney is Kennan Dandar.

February 22, 2000: the medical examiner ruledthat Usa McPherson's deathwas accidental. The medical examinerhadearlierruled that the cause of deathwas"undetermined." Four months later, the StateAttorney General dropped the criminal charges against the Church of Scientology; civil charges were still ongoing. LaterCOSbrought an action againstthe McPherson family and Robert Minton, a formermember whofounded the Usa McPherson Trustto help 'victims of Scientology'. COSalleged that Minton was directing the lawsuit, ratherthan the family. (COSdemanded $2,00,050, but received $4,500in August2003, and hasto pay Dandar'sattorney fees accumulated from the time of the settlement offer).

2002: COS arguedthat it hadalegal rightto hold Usa againstherwill, denyher access to medical care and contactwith familyandfriendsbecause shewas a parishioner and her treatment was a religious practice

2002: The proceedings took a turn as Minton, previously very critical of COS, accused Dandar of pressurising himto lie in court aboutCOS, and also accused Dandar of beinga liar. Stacy Brooks, Minton's friendandDandar's key consultant on Scientology issues, suddenly also accused herattorneys of beingliars. US mediawere writingaboutthe 'collapseof the Scientology opposition'. Dandarargues that Minton and Brooks being blackmailed by COS (theyare bothformermembers). Minton andBrooks haveadmitted, in their crossexaminations, to having hadsecretmeetings with COSattorneys and other officials beforetheir 'change of sides'. COS urgedthat the lawsuitshould be dismissed because of professional misconduct by Dandar.

2003: JudgeSusan Schaeffer ruled that the wrongful deathlawsuitshould continue, andthat Dandarshould remain the attorney for the estateof Usa McPherson. Schaeffer concluded that Minton was lying. The lawsuit is to continue in autumn 2003.

2002 Ireland. Dublinwoman in HighCourtlegal action for Damages. MaryJohnson had beena memberof COSfor two years; and sued of the experiences and pressures she claimed she suffered while a member, and threats and intimidation she suffered when

2 Allegedly, COS now has a release formfor thoseundergoing 'introspection rundown'. Participants must a form stating theywill not sue if harmed, andthat they COS members will retrievethemshould they entera psychiatric institution 2.cs.cmu.edul-dst/Scientology/ReleaseForms/lntrospection.html). Inform report 13110/2003 Scientology tryingto leave. 2003, after31 daysof evidence andsubmissions, the casewas settled, no detailsof the settlement were disclosed.

2002Germany. VivienKrogman Lutz, 23, suedher parents (Scientologists) for damages. The damages included sending her to Saint Hill (UK headquarters) as part of the SeaOrg while a minor (13), where the work regimeleft herwith lasting orthopaedic damage. The case was settled within 3 hours. The parents and COS lawyers agreed to pay Vivien 35,000 Euros, -.

2002USA. The ending of a suit which was part of a 22-year legalbattle between Wollersheim, a formermember, and COS. In 1980Wollersheim filed a suit for harassment, ·andin 1986a California jury awarded him $30million in damages- reduced to $2.5million following an appeal. Whilethe appeal was pending COSfiled anotheraction in 1993 alleging prejudice by the Judge. The latter believed he was being followed throughout the trial and that members of COSwereresponsible for slashing his cartires and for his dog drowning. Declarations submitted revealed that COS "doctrine andemployment of litigationpractices (were) designed 'to bludgeon the opposition intosubmlssion." The declarations alsorevealed "attacks against judges who rule againstit." (COSv.Wollersheim 1996). Wollersheim also included part of the Fishman declaration in whichthe latterstated he had beenordered by COSto participate in the callingof jurors in the middleof the night, and had drowned a dog that belonged to a judge(Ibid.). Wollersheim didn'treceive the money until 2002, whenthe courtordered COS to pay $8.67million;the previous $2.5millionincluding interest.

1999 UK Following a six-year legal battle, the Church of Scientology agreed to pay£55,000 libel damages to Bonnie Woods, a former member of the church tumed born-agai n Christian. Bonnie Woods, an American, moved to England in 1985. Woodspubliclycriticised Scientology, spoketo the mediaabouther experiences as a member andhanded out documents whichwerevery critical of the church. In June 1993, the Church of Scientology Religious Education College - responsible for the propagation and of Scientology in the UK - produced a leafletdescribing Woods as a hatecampaigner and a deprogrammer whotried to force people awayfrom their chosen faith. In December 1993BonnieWoods suedthe Church of Scientology Religious Education College, andthe individual members who had published the leafletfor libel.

1997 UK A documentary on the life of L. Ron Hubbard was shown as part of the 'Secret Lives' serieson Channel 4. Scientology employed its top private investigator, Eugene . Ingram, to keeppeople involved with the programme under surveillance.

1996USA. The Federal Courtof Appeal in San Francisco said that Scientology had played 'fast and loosewith thejudicialsystem'and levied$2.9 million in sanctions againstthe church (Religious TechnologyCenter v. Scott, et al.),

1992-1996 USA. Scientologists filed 40 to 50 suitsagainst the Cult Awareness Network (CAN), an anti-cult group in the US, and its officers. The church claimed that CAN discriminated by refusing to allow Scientologists to attend conventions or join chapters. 1996USA. CANwas bankrupted after it lost a deprogramming case. The Foundation for Religious Freedom, a coalition of religious libertyactivists including somededicated Scientologists, bought the old CAN name andtelephone number and beganoperating a CAN. The old CAN protested to boththe bankruptcy courtandthe district court of that its namehadbeen soldto a cult and was beingusedfor unscrupulous purposes, butwas told that it had no standing to objectdue to a lack of monetary interest in the sale.

1993USA. JudgeJames M.ldeman was presiding a suit involving Scientology in a Federal DistrictCourtin LosAngeles when he withdrew fromthe case. In a court statement, he saidhe couldno longer preside fairly because the church u • • •has recently begunto harass myformerlawclerk whoassisted me on this case".

1991 USA. Richard Behar, an investigative reporter, wrotea coverarticleaboutthe church in Timemagazine. The articlecalled the church 'a hugelyprofitable global racketthat survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner.' The church and a member sued Inform report13/10/2003 Scientology

Time and Beharfor libel, and the company spentmorethan $7million defending the cases The church's suit was in 1996by a Federal DistrictCourtjudge. Scientology lost its appeal. Beharsaid that afterthe article ran, he had been by Scientology agents and had beenso he had hired bodyguards.

1990 USA. In US v. Fishman, Stephen Fishman himself againstcharges of mail fraud on the basisthat Scientology hadtaken control of his mind. Fishman called upon psychologist MargaretSingerto to the effects of the Church of Scientology's manipulation of him. Or Singer, a prominent promoter of the 'brainwashing' theory, had testified in numerous trials concerning new religions in the 1980s. In the Fishman case, a numberof scholars argued that Singerpostulated a 'robot' theoryof brainwashing that lacked . scientific support. The court accepted these arguments, concluding that Singer's theories regarding the coercive persuasion practised by religious cults 'are not sufficiently established to be admitted as evidence in federal law courts.' As a result, Singerwas denied the stand and Fishman's defencecollapsed. Singer subsequently deniedthe stand in several additional cases.

1989 USA. Margery Wakefield had sued COS in 1982andthe case settledout of courtsix yearslater;Wakefield agreed neverto talk about hertime in COS. The Judgealsoforbade herto breakthe gag-rule. In 1989Wakefield contacted themedia in Floridaand brokethis rule. COS lawyers argued for criminal and civil contempt, 60 monthsin jail and $240,000 in damages againstthe church. No hearingwas scheduled.

1986USA. The Federal Court of Appeal in Boston said evidence in an extortion case indicated that Scientology investigators had induced witnesses to lie. One of these investigators was EugeneM. Ingram. This was in the Flynnv. Hubbard case(USDCfor the District of Massachusetts) where Flynnargued he hadbeenharassed by COS undertheir 'fair game' policy. The latter is a practicepublished in a policyletter by Hubbard in 1967, and allegedly usedagainst'enemies', who, according to the text "[m]ay be deprivedof property or injured by any meansby anyScientologistwithout any disciplineof the Scientologist. May be tricked, suedor lied to or destroyed".

1973-6 USA. "Operation Freakout." Formermember Paulette Cooper had 14 lawsuits filed againsther by COS and was indicted by a grand jury on two countsof making bomb-threats againstCOS, and of committing by denyingthe accusations. The charges were finally dropped, and in 1977the evidencefound in the FBI raid on COS officesshowed that she had been framedin what COS internallyreferred to as'Operation Freakout'. The majortargetof this operation was, according to an internal COS publication, 'To get P.C. incarcerated in a mental institution or jail, or at leastto hit her so hardthat she dropsher attacks".

Examples of friction per country

USA 1977 Senior members of the movement's Guardian's Office, including Hubbard's wife, were convicted of stealing government documents. This followed a raid on the movement by the FBI.

1993 The US Internal RevenUe granted COSfull tax exemption as a bonafide religion, after doggedly refusing to do so for 25 years - a refusal that had been backed by all the American courtsright up to the Supreme Court. Four years later the New YorkTimes published an article arguing that the reversal occurred a result of Scientology waging an all-outwar onthe tax authorities. At one time, according to the article, the organisation and its members hadmorethan 50 lawsuitspending against the IRS, and had hireddetectives to dig up the dirt on top IRS officials. One of these officials told the New York Times he hadworked for Scientology for 18 months from 1990to 1992. From his Maryland office he hadgathered information on officialswho missedmeetings, dranktoo muchor had extra-marital relations. Hence, the articlestates, on express instructions from the IRS commissioner, the Church of Scientology was granted religious status by a special decisionthat circumvented the usual Inform report 13/10/2003 Scientology procedures (Frantz, D. "Scientology's Puzzling Journey From Tax Rebel to Tax Exempt", The NewYorkTimes, 9 March 1997).

CANADA 1991 Crown Attorney CaseyHill of Toronto hadbeen advising the OPPon a massive raid of Scientology's headquarters resulting in a series of criminal charges andconvictions against COSandsomestaffmembers irr1983. COSandtheir lawyer Morris Manning held a news conference andmadestatements that a jury in 1991 found to havebeen maliciously libellous of Hill. Hill was awarded $1.6millionin damages, incl. interest andlegal cost.

1992. The Toronto chapter of the COSandthree of its members (Jacqueline Metz, Janice Donald Whitmore) werefound guiltyof breach of trust. It wasthe first time a Church in Canada was convicted on criminal charges. Thecourt heardthat between 1974and 1976 the Guardian Offices planted 12 members as employees in the Ontario Provincial Policeand the Ontario attorney-general's office, allegedly to gainaccess to information the organisations hadgathered on the church. Charges of theftweredismissed when the evidence againstthe church was ruled inadmissible by Justice James Southey. In 1997the Ontario Courtof Appeal upheld the conviction of COSof Toronto andoneof its officers ontwo counts of criminal breach of trust. A threejudge panel rejected arguments byCOSlawyers that incorporated non-profit religious associations should not be heldliablefor unauthorised criminal actscommitted by individuals withinthe ranks.

GERMANY 1995 Germany's Labour Minister ordered that labouroffices in the country mustidentify companies owned by Scientology by an S in all of their computer records. According to the Church of Scientology, We seem to be observing a descent intomadness that hasominous similarities to some events in Germany in the early1930's.'

Germany has. beencitedby The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance for religious intolerance and rightsviolations against Scientologists.

Several German courts have the Church of Scientology as a legitimate religion, underArticle4 of the German Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion. In 1997 the Supreme Administrative Courtfound thatthe services provided by a Scientology Mission arespiritual in nature. In 1996Freiburg County Courtstated thattherewas no circumstance underwhich the Church of Scientology should be denied the protection of Section 4, paragraph 2 of the Constitution.

However, in 1996, at a Conference of the Minister Presidents of States, it was stated that it was deemed necessary that the govemment on Federal, Stateandlocal levels should warn aboutthe practices of Scientology anduse all legal possible waysto counter the organisation's intention to 'owneverything'.

1996 The Bavarian StateGovernment stated that it refused to hireor continue the employment of members of the Church of Scientology. It stated that alljob applicants and existing employees wouldhaveto complete a form detailing anyties to the church.

1996 The UN Human Rights Committee stated that the decision by the Bavarian government to exclude Scientologists from publicsectoremployment was a worrying development that could violate rightsthat Germany is legallybound to guarantee.

FRANCE 1996 Following a government report, Scientology was officially listed along with a broad spectrum of groups including Buddhists, Baptists and Evangelical Christians as one of 172 'dangerous cults'. Scientology says its members are subjected to slander andpersecution. It Inform report13/10/2003 Sdentology claimsmembers havebeenrefused the rightto open bankaccounts andteachers havebeen fired onthe basisof their affiliation with Scientology.

The Lyoncase 1996 Jean-Jacqes Mazier, a formerleaderof Scientologists in Lyon, was given an 18month jail sentence and another 18 monthsuspended sentence for involuntary homicide andfraud. Thiswas in connection with the suicidein 1988of Patrice Vic; the courtruledthat MrMazier hadputintolerable pressure on to payfor Scientology courses. 1997A courtof appeal in Lyon recognised the Church of Scientology as a religion, thereby rescinding Mr Mazier's conviction. The Minister of the Interior statedthat the courthad exceeded its authority, andthat the government did not recognise Scientology as a religion. Thegovernment appealed to the French Constitutional Court, which upheld the appeal court's decision. 1999 Mazierwas sentenced to 3 years in prison and a £60,000 fine.

2000A French government report described Scientology as a dangerous organisation that threatens publicorderand human dignityand called for its dissolution.

In 2001, the Parisbranch of the Church of Scientology was takento courtfor attempted fraud, false advertising, andviolation of the DataPrivacy Act. The casewas brought bythree persons, including a formermemberof the group, who alleged that they continued to receive massmailings despiterequests to betaken off lists.According to pressreports, the prosecutor requested that the court consider dissolving the church inParis; however, there was no legalrequest for dissolution. On May 17,2002, the courtfoundthe Paris branch guilty of violating the privacyof formermembers andfined themapproximately 8,000Euros; however, the branch was cleared of attempted fraudandfalse advertising. The courtfined the president of the lIe-de-France section of the organization approximately 2,000 Euros.

GREECE 1997 Scientology, operating as the Centerof AppliedPhilosophy, was labelled a dangerto society and ordered to closeby an Athenscourt. According to JudgeConstandia Angelaki: 'It is an organisation with medical, socialand ethical practices that aredangerous and harmful. It claimsto actfreely so as to draw members who subsequently undergo...brainwashing by dictated waysof thinkingthat limit reaction capabilities.' Aftera failed appeal, theCenter closed downandwas liquidated in 1999. According to Scientology president HeberJentzsch, the casewas reminlscent-of the formerjunta that ruledGreece as a totalitarian state.

2003 The Greekministerof Education and Religious Affairshas rejected the GreekChurch of Scientology's request for permission to operate a houseof prayer, on the basis it does notconstitute a church.

ITALY 1997 In Milan, 29 Scientologists were sentenced to jail on criminal charges that included taking advantage of peopleregarded as mentally weak. A spokesman for Scientology said that Scientologists were being persecuted in Italyjust as in Germany. At the end of the year, the criminal convictions were overturned by Italy'shighestcourt, whichordered a newtrial. The Milancourthad maintained that Scientology was not a religion; thejudges religion as 'a systemof doctrines centred on the presupposition of the existence of a Supreme Being, who hasa relation with humans, the latterhavingtowards him a duty of obedience and reverence'. The ItalianCourt of Cassation (theSupreme Courtfor jurisdictional purposes) regarded the Milantheisticdefinition of religion as 'unacceptable' and'a mistake' because it was'basedonlyon the paradigm of Biblical religions'. As a consequence, the Milanjudges could exclude Scientology's non-theistic worldview from the sphere of religion. The 48-pages decision of the Supreme Courtalsoexamines someof the arguments usedby critics(and by the Milan 1996judges)to deny Scientology religious status. Inform report 1311012003 Scientology

2000 the Italian Supreme Courtconfirmed thatScientology is a religion underItalian law, but stated that the for-profit activities of Narconon, Scientology's drugrehabilitation branch, are nottax-exempt.

BELGIUM 1997The Belgian parliamentary commission on sects issued a report which blacklisted 189 minority religions induding as well as a number of mainstream Catholic groups, Quakers, the YWCAand almost all Buddhists. Inthe end, the report was adopted but notthe list of 189groups.

. SPAIN 1988 Sixty-nine delegates to an international Scientology conference in Spain were heldfor questioning about alleged offences ranging fromfraud and tax evasion to kidnapping. All but 20 werelater released. Among thosearrested wasHeberJentzsch, the organisation's president whowas on bail.

1995Spanish authorities formally indicted Jentzsch and17 othermembers of the organisation on charges stemming fromthe 1988 investigation.

2001 A Madrid courtacquitted 15persons indicted afterthe 1988investigation of charges of illicit association andtax evasion. Scientology representatives asserted that the indictment against Jentzsch, whowas not partof thetrial, wasreligiously based; officials denied this assertion. At the prosecutor's recommendation, the court dismissed the caseagainst Jentzsch in April 2002.

Internet

Since 1994, the church hasaggressively pursued a number of lawsuits in an attempt to defend its copyright on confidential church documents. This hasbroughtit into conflictwith numerous Internet usersandservice providers who promote freedom of speech on the Net.

2003 COSlost a Dutch courtcase against XS4ALL, a Dutch Internet provider which publishes -material the Church of Scientology triesto control. In summary: The casehas been going onfor seven or years, and Scientology hasappealed several times. Scientology lost what hasbecome known as a 'copyright' casein theThe HagueCourtof Appeal- the courtrejected all of Scientology's claimsin its action against the Dutch ISPXs4all, writer Karin Spaink, andten otherInternet providers, for publishing copyrighted material on the Internet. The caserevolved around evidence submitted in a previous casebetween Scientologyand Fishman, a member who hadcommitted crimes in orderto get money to pay for his courses. Fishman blamed Scientology for his crimes, andScientology sued. In order to supportthe claimthat Scientology had'brainwashed' him, Fishman used several documents thatScientology onlymakes available to members whohavereached a certain withinthe organisation. As a result, the documents became publicmaterial, andthe 'Fishman affidavit' has been traveling on the Internet eversince.

2002 Web search engine Google hadto cavein to demands fromCOSto deleteURLsfrom its database directing Web surfers to certain pages maintained by Xenu.net, a well-known COScritic. COS persuaded Google that it was liablefor copyright infringement (according to the digital Millennium Copyright Act), because Xenu.net hasmirrored excerpts from COS 'sacredtexts'. Google removed the references.

1999 A lawsuitinvolving morethan 1,900 copyright-infringements was settled between the church and Boulder, Colorado-based FAC.T. NET, Inc. FAC.T. NET,lnc. haddisclosed secret upper-level teachings ontheir website. COSobtained a federal search warrant and seized the organisation's computers. Both sidesaccumulatednearly$7 million in legal fees during the four-year battle. FAC.T. NET, Inc.agreed to cease posting anyworksby L. Ron Hubbard or any Scientology organisation on its site. Informreport 13/10/2003 Scientology

1998 The churchwas awarded $3 millionas the resultof a lawsuit it filed againstGracty Ward, who was publishing church documents on the web. Ward hasto paythe Church of Scientology $200 a monthand can no longerpostthe textson the net.

Enquiries to Inform

There havebeen 327 enquiriesaboutScientology since 1996:

44 in 1996 . 100 in 1997* 65 in 1998 33 in 1999 31 in 2000 10 in 2001 26 in 2002 17 in 2003

* The largenumberwas partly due to The Vanessa Program which did a piece on cults including COS, and which gaveInform'stelephone number as a resource for further information).

62 from the media 34 from 31 from government bodies 31 from parents 26 from currentmembers 23 from relatives

18 from lawfirms/soncttorszoarristers 17 from friends/colleagues 16 unidentified churchnetwork(incl. diocesan advisors) members of the general public 7 formermembers 6(possible) prospective members 6chaplains 7 other 5 Education Institutions

Mediaenquiries tendto be about certain issuesincluding; COS' statuswithinthe UK;·with the charitycommission; its acceptance as a religion in general; its statusin variouscountries; advertising campaigns (particularly the ITC's decision to allow COSto advertise on in 1996/97).

Parents, friends andotherfamily members tendto haveconcerns that a memberhas changed, no longerhastime for them, neglects old friends, partners, etc. There are also concerns overfinances - the amount of moneyspenton courses, members getting into debt (oneestimates son'sdebt at £2000, anotherat £4000). Parents express concerns when their children join whilst at university or go abroad to studyor work for COS (a numberof enquiries mention young members attending a shorttraining course in LA). A number also mention that the member has signed a contract to work at Saint Hill. Informreport13/10/2003 Scientology

A reasonably large number of enquiries havecomefromcurrent members - about half express doubtsovertheirinvolvement, general unhappiness, concerns overfinances, and rumours regarding COS.

Lawfirms contact us in preparation for legal cases. Theseinclude employment cases, personal grievance cases, child custody cases, and more. Otherinstitutions (Le. hospitals, universities, charities, prison services) contact us regarding Scientology's statusas well as the statusof Narconon, Criminon, and otherScientology subsidiaries. Several studentunions contacted us when COSoffered them£800in return for placing two 1o-page supplements aboutScientology in their student newspaper.

Some examples

1991 A woman contacted Inform afterher husband's involvement had left them with a £16,000 overdraft; he had spentin excess of £25,000 (a proportion of that raised by a mortgage on the house) andwas negotiating furtherloansas well. Inform mediated, which overtime led to COS refunding approximately half of the money, as well as expelling the husband. He consequently became very unhappy, his business collapsed, andhe continued to struggle financially.

2000 A psychiatrist who had suggested electra-convulsive therapyfor a seriously mentally disturbed and suicidal psychiatric patient was being harassed by the patient's family members, who were members of COS. COS hasa strong stanceagainst psychiatry and certain forms of medication, andhas a historyof protesting andpicketing against psychiatry. Nonetheless he received a second opinion, took legal advice, and he, a colleague andthe hospital trustdecided to continue with the recommended treatment, for whichthe patienthad to be sentto anotherhospital by ambulance. Thefamily andotherCOS members physically obstructed the proceedings, and as a result the hospital aborted the trip. The family lodged a complaint againstthe doctor, who became the subject of a longenquiry, andwas eventually cleared. The patientwastransferred to a colleague, who, considering the history, decided against shocktherapy. The patienteventually attacked and seriously harmed anotherpatient. The doctorcontinued to be harassed.

2001 A charitywas the residual beneficiary of someone's will. Also included in the will was a bill from COSfor 'prayerful metaphysical work' over 12months, whichincluded charges for homevisits, telephone conversations andtravel expenses. The bill was £3660. The travel expenses of the COS healer, however, werefor daysthat the person had probably not been at home. The bill had beencreated two daysafterthe person's death. The executors of the will wereunsure as to whetheror notto paythe bill.

For moreinformation, pleasecontact Inform www.inform.ac [email protected] From: Sent: 11 October 200314:45 To: Subject: Re: Scientology JR

Hi sorry for.the delay but life became hectic on.Fjiday as I had only just returned from Hungary. the paragraph is fine except I would be happier if you took out "legal" (10-12 legal cases) as many do not end up being pursued legally. Also could you remove the word "recent" (recent cases) as one of the cases is from .severat years ago. You could also include a case of a widow whose husband suddenly died of cancer who was left with debts she knew nothing about and was about to have her house and car repossessed. She had young children. and I managed to recover over £20,000 for this lady. You could also say that the girl with psychiatric needs had her case against Scientology settled for a substantial amount. best wishes

---- Original.Message ---- From: To: Sent: Friday, October 10, 200311:14 Subject: FW : Scientology JR

> > > Please take a look at the following re our conversation earlier > today. Please amend/add as you see fit so that it accurately.portrays > your view. If you could turn this around fairly quickly I'd be extremely > grateful. > > "Catalyst is a charity organisation which provides counsefing and legal > services to those affected by cults/new religious movements. On the > Church of Scientology, Catalyst receive around 10 -12 legal cases each > year concerning allegations of fraud and psychiatric damage from > ex-members the church. For example, recent cases have involved a young > girl with psychiatric needs being held against her will by the church and a man who within six weeks of membership spent £28,000 on church » activities. Catalyst also highlighted that the Church have recently > introduced the requirement for new members to sign a disclaimer which > clearly states that they will not take legal action against the church . > Catalyst are clear that the church of Scientology appears to be one thing > to new members Le. a life transforming technique, but is actually > something which has harmful mental, social and economic affects on an > individual." > > Kind regards > > > > > Faith Communities Unit > Home Office > >

> This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. I f you have received this email in error please return it to the address it came from telling them it is not for you and then delete it from your system.

This email message has been swept for computer viruses.

**********************************************************************

PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET.

On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning .service supplied exclusively by Cable &Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs.

GSI users see http://www.gsLgov.uklmain/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdf for further details. In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk Home Office

FAX To:

From:

Date: 10/10/03

Time: 16:55

Fax number:

Number of pages: 2 (including this one)

If any part of this fax is unclear please telephone:

Message:

Please see attached letter re our conversation yesterday. Home Office

. Faith Communities Unit

E-mail

Date 10 October 2003

Dear

As .per our telephone conversation yesterday evening, I am currently working on the Home Office's response to a Judicial Review which has been requested by the Church of Scientology. The Church has requested the review on the basis that a Home Office policy within the Prison Service is discriminatory towards a Scientology prisoner.

c 0 ._ •. ... •

If you have any information or are prepared to make a statement in relation to this then please contact me at the address or telephone number above.

sincerelv

Faith Communities Unit Page 1 of 1

From: Sent: 09 October 2003 15:11 To: Subject: statements (Scientology) Dear' " Just to let you know that I now have six statements for you, I have to be outtoday from 9.30am until-after lunch. I will ring you this afternoon &arrange to let you have the statements. I think you will find them good and useful for your purpose. rang after I spoke to you, intending the speak to but discovered that has gone to another position. asked me to find the name of the spoke to - he has since forgotten it.

PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET.

On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs.

GSI users see http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdfforfurtherdetails.In case ofproblems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk

09/10/03 FROM 01:

For me, Scjcntology and similar represent the closest thing to "cvll' that exists modem society. The methods people against those whom they regard as as much ofany organizatlon: unfortunately however, in country they not which yet further the frustration suffering oftheir families.

ci., - TUI I 1 • I 09, 07:01 02

The Church Scientology misnomer - there is no ufa church a religion. an insidious organization upon vulnerable people the pretext and friendship. My son only 18 when Sclentology

operate ofsystematic mind so that all think what toldto think do what are told do: Sclentology 2 ofour family's in that it myson from happy. Intelligent someone who was unable tothink himself, unable to his or direction his should lIe was not able reason the simplest of spoke what Scicntology told him say and was to reason with him. l le had been taught techniques which he could block out anyone to him was outside Scicnrology's doctrine.

His was destroyed promising undergraduate course abandoned for than two

Sclentology's in the ofyoung Intellectually-able people is financial gainas immediately charging them for "life improving" courses are in reality Scientology's ofaccessing the mind in order to gain tota! control.

.1 I .t IIt..JTT :rOBER 21211213 1217:1212

STATEMENT FROM THE PARENl OF A SCIENTOlOGISi

statement comes from parents of a very sick man, our YOlJngest son several years was recruited into Church Scientology.

Our family life becameintollerable as it was seriously byour son'stotallyirrational behaviour. He was lost,for a period of in London. Later he was found in a seriously ill condition was home admitted to a local mental hospital for a of time.

During thistime, we him regularly and triedto to rnedical staff, the reason forhis illness. However became an almostimpossible task and once a weekend visithome he became so that he threatened his life.

Later he was released from hospital and again he went awayand was difficult to trace.

Now he has been sectioned again appears to be making progress. The staff, whonowcarefor him,appear to be listening andlearning about nowagrees thathe helpand thehelpof counsellors the family is beginning to observe his possible recovery.

It is ouropinion thatScientology is because it promises freedom mental illnesses but in factcanbe cause of conditions. Our observation ofScientology is that youngpeople submit& then become slaves, being unable to break free, once theyhave become involved. Family lifecan be destroyed by Scientology.

._-._. - --- r:nMMIINTTY IINTT :TOBER 09. 2003 07:02 PAGE 04

STATEMENT AN seIENTOl.O(jY

I recruited into ScienLology in 1979. I had live with my elder sis and not at that time that she a Scicntologist. Almost overnight I into Scicntologist. Wc were both and were vulnerable.

My introduced Scicntology. explained how she had, one cold rainy day, invited into their shop to a personality test and with nothing better do, she She Immediately became

When Twas invited to do the personality test I thought "Why not?" whole test took the entire I met very nice people, were falling of which was rounded offby session.

J quickly, invited to be "on staff and) Very followed working at book and I not remember being paid. Our lives had to be with work (cleaning jobs) which began each day at jobs required long bus to remote and one in the office block an abattoir. All ofthis casual work had to be done in conjunction with the days in Scientology (headquarters), a day otrwas because ofexhaustion someone telephone and why not come to work. This was becoming much for me [0

My by this time, discovered what we were doing and were unhappy about our situation. Over period oftime they persuaded me to leave I returned home to which took a surprisingly long - over

J object to Scicntology's to be a religion becauseit is False are to recruits, ofexpensive courses, which purport to all problems could ever friendship of scicntologlsts 'immediately withdrawn when you reject the teachings and you then becomean outcast.

NRME:COMMUNITY COHESION UNIT P. 4 05

STATEMENT AN OF SClENTOLOCiY

Most people who enter Scientology been persuaded to do during an interview where the)' arc introduced to the idea their are not well and will not the training and counselling that Scicntology alone offer. Any problems ofeveryday lifc are and natural part ofthe in every life) is by the sclcntologlst as a poor excuse the real issue. It As with most of direction the reason that I Scicmology to enrich life. I found it hard to say During time in the organisation, I had experiences that later it clear that I must walk I to conflicting aspects:

l. All sctcniologlsts state it is only true if it is true for you". thatno one feel any ofthe doctrine they lndlffercnt find inapplicable or disagree with. Sometimes I in practice although was not intelligently done, 1"01' "I really don', how this-or-that me." "Oh...... exaggerated shrugging of nofurther It did odd to that no one ever replied with, •. l 've wondered about

2. lfanyonc not and it will bc a) they have something to feel guilty about. b) they have not studied and understood the text c) theyhave criminal tendencies d)

Many people enter scicntelogy in belief or otherwise) that life was not going right them and that help is on issues such as low fear of failure and loneliness. tseertng this in mind, it seems to me that most ofthc followers ofscientology would find it impossible to voice their opinions when faced with either of the

Add scenario the insidiousness ofthe of Scicntology in all olmoney - wages, compulsory stafftraining (self-financed) and Ior discontinuance ofstaff tu but a few. Most religions are difficult lo As to religious and spiritual content, whcn applied, sclentology mayor may not be useful, This seems in view of the damage caused through policies which only entrapment ofthe Individual and the control of tree thought. I hundreds of Scientologlsts all levels and seen appalling upon the quality oftheir lives their opportunities for the pursuit of happiness. Lots ofpcoplc it up. Some leave suddenly mysteriously, some sink into oblivion and so asked (ordered) to Ieave some forever. I have no ofthose who stay in, would to be somewhere else. But I know how much courage it takes to leave .

1 I had a joh on the I met people. witnessed problems sclentology. J have a big, nice family and clever woman for a mother. and sense prevailed in end.

q _ _ I 1 NRME:COMMUN I TY COHESI ON UNIT P. 5 ;r OBER 10,

Statement about Scientology

This document contains my opinions on the subject of Sclentology. I am not an academic but my sibling jOining Scientologycaused to research the subject and conclude that it is not gOOd thing and is harmful. In this document I refer to appendices, these should be clicked on as they contain writingsby L Ron Huobarc and others that have led me to make my opinions. My opinions are offered to the court without prejudice and I understand that my anonymity will be protected.

Why I Dianetlcs Is not a good

• My personal experience of having a family member is a Scientologist hasbeen traumatic, frightening and left me feeling sad that we will not be to have the relationship • Scientologywastes peoples time. SCientologists believe that they are working for the good of civilisation but are being duped into working for an evil and fraudutentsystem. • l Ron Hubbard was a science fiction writer, a stage and an .occetust he brought all of these skills into the organisation that he created only started calling it a religion to avoid tax. He then found that his organisation a religion protected it from prosecution for being fraudulent and criminal. He called non Scientogists"wogs" and meal". • When Scientologystarted its founder called it a "mental science". Currently, in this country, Scientologyclaims to be a religion or a religious philosophy. Also, it claims to be religion based on scientific pnncipres. In Greece it claims to be a and claims not to be a religion. If Scientology is a religious philosophy or a mental science then the founder (l Ron Hubbard) who wrote the materials for the philosophy (or sclence) must surely have to have been a good and well developed person with a high emotional IQ. However, when we l Ron Huobard's life we find that he someone who: 1. knew he was mentally ill sought help (see appendix 1) 2. was a petty thief (see appendix 2) 3. was assessed by the as "mental" (see appendix 3) 4. claimed to be a nuclear physicist but was not (see appendix 4) 5. was diagnosed as a paranoid SChizophrenic (see appendiX 5). 6. was a wife beater appendix 6) 7. claimed to be a cosmologist but was not (see appendix 7) 8. was probably mentally ill (see appendixes 8 and . 9. was an occultist (see appendix 10) 10. claimed that he was a naval hero was not (see appendix 11) 11. claimed that he was a doctorate but was not (see appendiX 12)

rnMMII"'TTV IINTT TOBER 10, 02

12. ctauneo that he was a scientist but was (see .appendix 13) 13. claimed that he was a Nobet prize winner but was not (see appendix 14) .14. was a convict (see appendix 15. was an (see appendix 16) .16 . claimed that he was a humanitarian but was not (see appendix 17) 17. abused alcohol appendix 18) was anti Christian (see appendix 19) 19.was an adulterer (see appendix 20) 20. was a bigamist (see appendix 21) 21. Claimed Dianetics was a researched science, untrue appendix 22)

L Ron Hubbardand hiSwife and ten others were during a 1980 trial sentenced to prison terms for a conspiracy which included burglaryl bugging, theft, kidnapping, false imprisonment, .anc coaching Witnesses to lie.

Do you think that a person such as the one could create beneficial science or philosophy? Do you think that anyone in a rational and free thinking state of mind could admire such a character and attach great wisdom to his words? Icannot answer yes to the two questions posed; therefore have to conclude that my family member is folloWing an evil organisation.

• Scientologists are being deceived when they are taught about L Ron Hubbard, this is fraudulent. Also, from the above facts I conclude that Scientology I Dianetics is not founded on Scientific principles, and that the author of the materials of Scientology and dlanetics was not philosopher or even a man. Surely. an evil creates only an evil system. • Scientology recruits most Ofits followers from the street by a free personality test that was written by a Scientologlst with no training. has no connection with the University of OXford. 1 his test is The Scientology sales staff are drilled in hard selling tecnnlques. The first stage of recruitment is to focus the person's attention on most areas of his or her life rutn"). Hypnotherapists might can an "emotional induction". Any intense emotion tends to overwhelm critical thinking. The coolness of rational thinking is distinct from the heat of emotions. The recrUiter then plays upon the persons fear that the will worsen. Then the "solution" of is offered. Whatever problem the immediate solution almost always the Communication Course; and indoctrination into L Ron HUbbard's ideas about "Suppressive • Family members who are concerned about sclentology, and to the organisation outlining their ccncems. and asking questions, replies. • Much of the Scientology organisations own material casts doubt on the extent to the organisation actually sees itself as a religion. • All Ofl Ron Hubbards spoken and wntten words are considered scriptural and must be complied With absolutely.

T 1 NAME: COMMUNITY COHESION UNIT P. 2 iCTOBER 10, 22 FAX: PAGE

Why Scienfo/ogy/ Dienetics is harmful?

• Since authorities'in France, Spain Italy have raided more than 50 Scientologycenters. charges against more than 100 of its overseas

church members inciuoe fraud , extortion , capital flight, coercion I illegally practicing medicine and taking advantageof mentally incapacitated people, (See appendix • Scientology and dianetics created by L Ron Hubbard to gain authoritarian control over deceived into joining any or his many organisations. L Ron Hubbard cynically constructed a set of hypnotic techniques masquerade as therapyand create progressive psychOlogical dependency upon the organizations of Scientology. L Ron Huboard also hid behind the pretence of religion. • Scientologists adhere to a set of POliCY letters and doctrines and consider them to be scriptures, these policies and doctrinesare destructive and simplistic and were written by l Ron HUbbard. They often rely upon labelling people and then applying a formulaic set of instructions when dealing them. • Scientologyhas a policy called Fair Game, which states that any person judged by Scientology to a suppressive person"may be deprived of property or injured by any means by any SCientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be sued or lied to or destroyed." During a 1980 trial, top Scientology offiCialS admitted that f-alr Game had never been withdrawn. (see appendix24) • Scientology has a policy that states "if anyone is trying to stop SCientology I can make Captain Bligh look like a Sundayscnoot teacher," And in another, *the law be used very easily to harass". 1he average cannot afford to legally defend themselves, and there are many people who have been financiallyruined because they have had the audacity to publicly state a negative opinion about this organisation. • SCientology is extremely litigious and uses the law to suppress free speech. Critics of Scientology can expect to be Visited by Private Investigators

working on behalfof the CUlt. to be spied upon and have their rubbish stolenI to receive malicious phonecalls, and solicitors letters threatening litigation. • A report into Scientology for the state of Victoria, Australia said, "Scientology is evil; its techniques evil; its practice a serious threat to the community, morally and socially. • Scientology/Diantetic courses are patent rubbish but Scientologists are taught to regard them highly to the extent that they are taught that exposure to high level will lead to them becoming ill and 'dying within few days. For example, one coursethey are taught that million ago was part Of a galactic federation run by evil ruler xenu. billions of to Earth, their spirits on electronic ribbons, and these were implanted With the images ofthe future. materialis from a course called OT III and the member has to

NAME:COMMUNITY COHESION UNIT p, 10.

have done all sorts of courses to get to this "high" level andwill have spent manythousands of pounds. • Scientology splits up via it's policy of "disconnection" and through it's . of Scientologisf areexposed to concerns as Potential Trouble Sources. The Scientologist then has to attend a course to learn how to "handle" the concerned family member or friend. This course and the resulting counselling gives Scientology total control of the PTS member. This results in the Scientologist being counselled by Scientology to manipulate their family to achieve goals that are laid out by Scientology. The Scientologist often has to report what has been said and report on'the relationship (see appendix 25). The result of PTShandling is a Scientologist who is willing to spy ontheir family on behalf ofScientology andemotionatly blackmail their family. • Scientology wascondemned by a 1971 government enquiryconducted by Sir John Foster QC, MP, • The mosldamning information on Scientology comes from its internal documents andcourse materials as non member I research and study these. However, Scientologisls are forbidden to read any material critical of Scientology, $0 they are not in a position to make an assessment of the organisation with which they are involved. • Scientology Is an organisation that prevents free thinking and exploits people for commercial gain and pretends to be a religion to deflectcriticism as . religious "persecution." • Scientology techniques indoctrinate members, this indoctrination usually begins with the Communication Course Training Routines or These have been called by one expert "the mostovert form of hypnosis used by any destructive cult." It i$ bad to be givensuggestions when underthe influence of • Scientology uses to police its members and ensure that they spy on each other and report transgressions such as saying anything negative about L Ron Hubbard, it punishes peoplewho Scientology deem to committed offences. • SCientology prisons exist for allegedly deviant high ranking members (from what is calledthe Sea Org). They are not allowed to leave until they have supposedly been rehabilitated fromtheir serious attitudinaland/or . problems; problems defined solely by In addition to a required five hoursa day study restncted in their contacts and must perform sometimes arduous assignments. • If RPF Inmates do not pertorm to leaders expectations,. find themselves in the RPF. According to a church dIstributed containing definitions of terms, the RPF's RPF segregates the does not paytnemfor their wor\<, limits their sleep to no than h.ours 'gt t and imposes extremely harsh punishments for addItional " .

NAME:COMMUNITY COHESION UNIT P. 4 CTOBER 05

• Scientologists be subject to checks (sec checks)" where they are specifically told that the e-meter (a type of crude lie detector), is not being used for auditing. They.sre then fired lots of quick questions that can result in

put into RPF. Also, such a thing as a N gang bang sec check" exists, similar to the above but where many involved in questions. • Scientologisls suffer mental health problems. After a survey of 48 groups, Conway and Siegelman reported that former Scientologists had the highest rate of violent outbursts, hanuomanons, sexual disfunction and suicidal tendencies. They averaged that full recovery from Scientology averaged at 12.5 year8. • Selentology has own intelligence training courses, and intelligencesystem to collect data, listen and file information. l Ron Hubbard saw Scientologyas an alternative form of government. L Ron Hubbard created a "special zone ptan" and stated that "a nationor state runs on the of its department heads, governors, or any other leaders. It Is easy to get posts in such areas...Don't bother to get elected. Get a job on the secretarial staff or the bodyguard ... don't seek the co-operation of groups. Don't ask permission". He wrote a memorandum on the Infiltration and control of governments that still remains in force today. • One ofSclentologys intelligence agencies tasks is to "dead agent" opponents and seek to find something.unpleasantto say about the critic, a agent is usually a mixture of half truths and lies that is sent out to defame critics. There exists a "dead agent" policy (appendix26). • Scientology also has procedures for infiltrating and controlling the media. • t,Ran Hubbard established the targets" of SCientology as "vital targets" of Sclentofogy: "T[arget] 1. Depopularising the enemy to a point of total obliteration. T[arget] 2, 1 aking over the controlor allegiance of the heads or proprietorsof all news media. 1Largetj 3. TaKing over the control or allegiance of key political figures. T(arget] 4. Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance" (appendix 26).

INTTY UNIT P. 5 NOTE ON SCIENTOLOGY

This note summarises the status of scientology in other countries; the arguments for denying it religious status expounded by some academics; and criticisms of the organisation, which, if supported by evidence and proven to be systemic may justify differences in the treatment of scientology in comparison to other religions. Where references are given to numbers, they refer to the accompanying bundle.

A The status of scientology in other countries

Germany

1. The German government considers the Scientology organisation a commercial enterprise with a history of taking advantage of vulnerable individuals and are concerned about the threat it poses to Germany's democratic society. The evidence they give for this is:

(i) Early 80s American Court case in which 11 top Scientologists were convicted for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting. (ii) 1994 case in which the US Supreme Court upheld a California court's finding of substantial evidence that Scientology practices took place in a coercive environment. (iii) September 1997 case in which the Illinois Supreme Court found that there was enough evidence to allege that Scientorogy had driven the Cult Awareness Network into bankruptcy by filing 21 lawsuits in a 17-month period (the Scientology organisation has now taken over its website). (iv) A New York Times article outlining a campaign by Scientology against the IRS and people who work there e.g. hiring private investigators to dig into the private lives of IRS officials. Earlier IRS refusals to grant tax exemption to Scientology had been upheld by every court and it was only following this campaign that the IRS decided to grant tax-emption. A Wall Street Journal article outlined details of a $12.5 million tax settlement between the IRS and Scientology, including the Scientology agreement to drop thousands of lawsuits against the IRS. (v) In 1996 French Courts in Lyon convicted several leading Scientologists of involuntary manslaughter fraud in a case where methods taught by Scientology were found to have driven a person to suicide. (vi) Usa McPherson's death. (vii) Scientology records seized in an FBI raid on church offices proving that "Scientology had come to Clearwater with a written plan to take control of the city. Government and community organizations were infiltrated by Scientology members" (New York Times) (viii) One of the highest German Courts, the Federal Labour Court ruled in 1995 that the Scientology branch in Hamburg was not a religious congregation, but clearly a commercial enterprise. It also held that Scientology utilises inhuman and totalitarian practices.

2. Bavaria requires all applicants for admission to Bavarian public service to indicate any connections to Scientology and those acknowledging a tie are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. To date Bavaria has not rejected any such applications.

1 3. Scientologists allege that there is wide-spread discrimination against them in Germany and have embarked on an international, campaign comparing their treatment to that of Jews under Hitler. A 1997 investigation by the UN's special Rapporteur into intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief heard from the Scientology Organisation and the German government on this topic and concluded that "where surveillance of the Church of Scientology is concerned, it . must be clearly and precisely recalled that the measures involved are for the purpose of observation and in no way prejudge the organization's nature and activities, in respect of which the evidence gathered by the authorities will be confirmed or invalidated or still under examination at the end of the observation period". A member of the UN Human Rights Committee stated in 1997 that in his view it was unacceptable that every applicant for a civil service position in Bavaria had to state whether or not he belonged to the Church of Scientology.

4. Two challenges to'Germany's practices regarding Scientology have gone to the ECtHR but both have failed the admissibility hurdle. Some German courts have recognized the Church of Scientology as a legitimate religion.

France

5. French legislation provides for organisations to register, inter alia, as "Associations of Worship" whose donations are exempt from tax, and "Cultural Associations" which are not exempt from tax. To qualify as an association of worship, a group's purpose must be solely the practice of some sort of religious ritual. The government does not recognise all braches of the Church of Scientology as qualifying religious associations for tax purposes.

6. Anti-cult legislation known as the "About Picard Law" was passed in 2001, creating a crime of "mental manipulation" and listing criminal activities for which an organisation could be SUbjectto dissolution.

7. Scientology remains on a list of "dangerous sects" published by the French Government in 1996. The French government has established a body called Mission interministerielle de vigilance et de lutte contre les derives sectaires to coordinate the monitoring of sects.

8. In 2002, the Paris branch of the Church of Scientology was. found guilty of violating the privacy of former members (sending them booklets after they had requested to be taken off the mailing list), but was cleared of fraud.

Belgium

9. In order to be recognised as a religious group, the religion must have a structure or hierarch; the grpup must have a sufficient (not defined) number of members; the religion must have existed in the country for a long period of time; it must offer a social value to the public; and the religion must abide by the laws of.the State and respect public order.Scientology is not recognised as a religion.

10. A commission into the dangers of sects in 1997 listed the Church of Scientology as one of 189 sectarian organizations that were mentioned during testimony before the commission - this became known in the press as the "dangerous sect list" but was never adopted as such by Parliament. There does not appear to be a current investigation into Scientology in Belgium.

2 11. In February 2001 the Church of Scientology took legal action to force the return of documents seized in a police raid. In January 2002 the Brussels Appellate Court ruled that the files were lawfully held and that the Church had violated privacy laws - they reportedly held reports detailing medical information, reports on people's intimate lives, including sexual conduct, testimony about family members and confessional reports obtained through the use of the electrometer . without the consent of .individuals. concerned.

Switzerland

12. A religious organization must register with the Government in order to receive tax-exempt status. There have been no reports of a non-traditional religious group applying for this.

13. In 2001 the Vaud cantonal church rejected a claim of religious discrimination by the Church of Scientology on the ground that the Church could not be considered a "real church" because it did not believe in God and because its services had no religious connection. '

14.-In '1997 the Government asked an advisory commission to examine the Church of Scientoioqy. Its report stated that the Church had characteristics of a totalitarian organization and had its own intelligence network but concluded that there was no basis for special monitoring of it as it did not represent any direct threat to security. It did, however, warn of the significant financial burden imposed on Church of ScientolQgy members and recommended re-examining the issue at a later date.

15. In 1995 Scientologists .appealed a Zurich city decision prohibiting them from distributing on public property. The Supreme Court upheld the decision that as the Scientologists activities are commercial in nature, and not religious, they should have the same freedom to distribute flyers on a permit basis as a fast-food chain.

ECHR case-law

16.. The only relevant ECHR case-law is the two German cases mentioned above, which did not get past the admissibility hurdle.

The USA

17. Scientology is recognised as a religion by the IRS for tax-purposes only. The IRS originally held that the Church was not exempt from tax, and this was upheld in all the courts it tested in. After a sustained campaign of litigation against IRS workers, the IRS agreed that it could be tax-exempt.

South Africa

18. South Africa recognises Scientology as a religion.

3 B Arguments against;recognition as a religion

Academics like Professors Wilson and Beckford would say that the fact that scientology has a belief system makes it a religion (to put it in extremely simple terms). However, does the motivation behind the creation of this belief system count when whether or not it is a religion? E.g. evidence showing it was established as a means of making money or evidence of a consistent pattern of fraud. Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi argues that this factor negates any religious aspects (see tab 24 ofbundle).

It is essentially a psychotherapy I self-improvement organisation like thousands of others that also believe in the existence of immortal spiritual entities butdo not claim religious status (see tab 24)

It uses lots of secular fronts and much of it is run like a business with an emphasis on profit-making (see tab 24). Germany considers it to be a commercial enterprise (see tab 3). Scientology itself has at times rejected its religious status where it has been expedient to do so (see tab 20, p.3 and tab 24, p.B-9). However, it should be remembered there are different organisations within Scientology, from the Church of Scientology to the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises ("WISE"), which runs its business consultancy and management programme - see the attached organagram.

4 C Criticisms o.fscientology

Criminalitv

Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi (tab 24}states that Scientology has an "extraordinary . criminal record" and cites-the following examples: • Germany: 1980, 11 scientologists convicted of conspiracy and theft against several federal offices • U.S.A: 1992. Church of Scientology of Toronto and 7 scientologists convicted on various criminal charges related to infiltration of the Ontario Provincial Police and the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General. • Greece: A case against Scientology's "Centre of applies Philosophy of Greece" revealed a document indicating that a Scientologist had given the centre a classified report from the Hellenic Intelligence Agency of the government. The organisation was ordered to cease operations completely. • Denmark: 1990 - a Scientologist and 2 private investigators received three month suspended sentences for illegal espionage;

I have also come across the following examples:

• France: .early 1990s - Lyon branch of the Church of Scientology was investigated for 5 years in the early 90s following the suicide a member. Prosecutors said that he had been under pressure from the Church to take an expensive treatment. The scientology leader in Lyon, Jean-Jacques Maier was sentenced to 3 years in jail for involuntary homicide and fraud, although the sentence was later reduced to a fine. The investigation then spread to look at the Church's finances and many other Scientologyofficials in Lyon were charged. Four were convicted of theft, complicity or abuse of confidence. (source: INFORM) • U.S.A: Early 1980s 11 top scientologists were convicted for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break into government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting. (Source: tab 3)

Harassment of crifics - Scientology advocated the "fair game doctrine" in the 1960s, which declared that enemies of the Church may be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist. This is no 'longer officially subscribed to (although Jon Atack thinks its methods are still employed - tab 23), but there is evidence of harassment of critics e.g. the alleged intimidation of IRS officials by hiring private investigators to look into the private lives of employees, and by issuing numerous law-suits. Apparently Scientology spends $20 million a year on litigation.

Unlawful practice of medicine - apparently this is an issue in France, Italy and Spain but I have unable to find anything more specific about this.

While not necessarily criminal activity, scientoloqy has some dubious practices, one of which is using 'false fronts' e.g. having bankrupted the Cult Awareness Network (an organisation providing information on CUlts) by filing so many hundreds of law suits against it, it then took over the Network's web site and telephone line without making it clear that it had done so. (see tab 23)

5 Threat to health

Brainwashing: the Rehabilitation Project Force ("RPF"); (See articles at tab G for more details, tab 20, and tab 23 p.8). The German government is concerned about the conditions at RPF camps, which are situated in America and Denmark. They are supposedly camps for "disobedient" sea-org members. There are . allegations that people put on isolation watches where an individual is forcibly confined after a "psychotic break"; are subjected to hours of interrogation, and are forced to carry out physical labour.

. Removal of members' free will: The article by Cavan-Attack, a former Scientology member (tab 23) details the aggressive recruitment techniques employed by the Church of Scientology: "NEVER let anyone simply walk out" & "When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe - never permit an 'open-minded' approach" (Hubbard), and the control mechanisms used to keep members within the Church. No disagreements with the teachings of the Church's founder, Ron L Hubbard are allowed and communication with anyone critical of the Church's teaching is forbidden. The article gives the impression that there is a specific aim of reducing the free-will of members, leaving them dependent onthe organisation, and convinced that they cannot leave.

The organisation holds very strong anti-psychiatry views. It replaces psychiatry with its own technique called the Introspection Rundown Auditor Course. This has been linked to the death of Usa McPherson in Florida in 1995. She was injured in a car crash and found to be physically unhurt but mentally unstable After a visit from scientologists at the hospital, she discharged herself and was looked after by scientologists (and allegedly subjected to an Introspection Rundown) up to her death 17 days later - she was found underweight, severely dehydrated and with bed bugs. Criminal charges of abuse of a disabled person and practicing medicine without a licence were filed against the Church but were dropped in 2000 after a medical examiner ruled her death was "accidental".

Scientology forbids medial assistance without consent from Scientology. All psychotherapy treatments are forbidden.

Threat to family life: Members of the Sea Org have described how the organisation effectively becomes a member's family at the expenseof spouses and children, for example a mother might only be allowed to spend an hour a day with her children. There have also been criticisms of the condition of nurseries and the environment in which children live there. Sea org members have related how they were persuaded to have abortions. (See tab 20)

Threat to security

Germany considers scientology to be a totalitarian organisation that poses a threat to democracy (see tab 3).

There is some evidence of a systematic infiltration of organisations - see e.g. above-mentioned cases in U.S.A and Greece.

The 'control mechanisms' employed by the Church - Hubbard claims that scientology has sufficient technology "to take over, seize and handle any government on the face of the Earth ... You can control men like you would control robots with those techniques" (tab 23 p.7)

6 This organagram is basedon information from the Religious Movements Homepage, but is only intended to give a rough idea of the structure of the Church of Scientology and does not daim to be entirely accurate.

OF SCIENTOLOGY

Leader: David Miscavige HQ: Church of Scientology International, Los Angeles

Religious Technology Centre Ensures that dianetic and scientology doctrine is being taught truthfully and how Hubbard intended. Sea Orgnisation The most prestigious group includes 5000 staff members .who occupy high positions in individual churches / Flag Ship Service Organisation Reserved for advance Scientologists

Flag ServiceOrganisati6n Offers all religious services and a few upper level courses.

Saint Hill Organisation Provides basic auditing and upper level training services

Celebrity Centres t Provide Class V services, alongside programs geared specifically towards artists Class V Organisations (churches) Conduct religious services and administer courses

c Scientology Mission International mission to provide primary Dianetic and Scientology services

IHELP Basic level of scientology, an organisation that helps "field auditors' minister outside the church

SCIENTOLOGY ALSO CONTROLS:

Narcanon (a drug-abuse treatment programme) Criminon (aims to re-habilitate criminals) WISE (World Institute of Scientology Enterprises, which promotes its business consultancy programme) CCHR (Citizems Commission on Human Rights) Cult Awareness Reform Group Index to Scientology Bundle

Recommended reading

A GENERAL

1. Memo by . Home Office * April 2003 2. Home Office preparatory briefs and note of conference New Religious Movements (NRM) 3. Description of the Church of Scientology by the 2001 "Religious Movements Homepage" - an organisation which promotes religious tolerance

Source: Home Office

B SITUATION IN GERMANY

4. Background paper produced by the German 2001 - 2003 Embassy in Washington (from their website) 5. US State Department report on Germany 2002 6. German Court decisions favouring Scientology (Source: Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance website) 7. UN Economic & Social Council visit to Germany December 1997 (Source: UN website) 8. UN Human Rights Committee of Germany January 1997 (Source: UN website) 9. Scientology Kirche Deutscholand v Germany (ECtHR) 1997 (Source: ECHR website) 10. Kellerv Germany (ECtHR) 1997 (Source: ECHR website)

C SITUATION IN FRANCE

11. International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights July 2003 report - and Germany (Source: IHF website) 12. U.S Department of State report on France (Source: State Department website) 13. Summary of"About-Picard" Act 2000 (Source: website ofProfessor of Comparative Religion at California State University) 14. Summary of Human Rights Committee meeting 1997 (Source: UN website) 15. Guardian report re Scientology trial February 2002 (Source: Guardian website) 16. Centre for Studies on New Religions - paper on France 2002 (Source: CESNUR website) 17. Associated Press article * 1997 o SITUATION IN SWITZERLAND & BELGIUM

18. U.S. Department of State Report on Switzerland 2002 19. U.S. Department of State Report on Belgium 2002

1 E ACADEMIC PAPERS

20. Scientology - is this a religion? * . 1999 By Stephen Kent (Source: University of Marburg's website) 21. The French and German versus American 2001 position over 'New Religions', Scientology, and human rights (Source: University ofMarburg's website) 22. The Creation of 'Religious' Scientology 1992 by Stephen Kent 23. General Report on Scientology by a former * undated Scientologist, Jonathan Caven-Atack 24. Scientology: Religion or Racket? * 2003 By BenjaminBeit-Hallahmi

F "THE FISHMAN AFFIDAVIT"

25. The declaration of Steven Fishman (sued by 1993 Scientology for publishing material critical of scientology during a criminal trial). 26. The Operating Thetans (supposedly secret texts)

(source: Karin Spaink's website - she,and various internet providers won a 7 yearlong case in the Hague Court ofAppeal last month defeating a challenge by the Church ofScientology trying to prevent them publishing, inter alia, this material) .

G THE REHABILITATION PROJECT FORCE ("RPF")*

27. Various news articles (reliability ofsources unknown) 2001

H MISCELLANEOUS

28. Re B & G 1985 Fam . Law 127 (summary) * 1985

2 _ ------

The Church of Scientology

I Profile I Beliefs I Current Issues I Unks I References I

I. Group Profile

I Biography I History I Sacred or Revered Texts I Size I Organization I

1. Name: Church of Scientology Scientology means "knowing about knowing," from the Latin word scio and the Greek word logos.

2. Founder: Lafayette Ronald (L. Ron) Hubbard

3. Date of Birth/Death: March 13, 1911/January 24, 1986

4. Birth Place: Tilden, Nebraska

5. Year Founded: 1954

6. Biography of Founder:

According to texts published by the Church of Scientology and its web page pertaining primarily to its founder, L. Ron Hubbard, always referred to as L. Ron by Scientologists; experienced early in his life the many facets of the human mind. At the age of 12, he learned from Commander Joseph C. Thompson, who was the first military official to study under Sigmund Freud in Vienna, Austria, the theory of psychoanalysis.

Hubbard was also influenced by his many world journeys to exotic locales, thus gaining an appreciation for Eastern philosophies rooted lnHlndulsrn, Buddhism, and Taoism. His studies in mathematics, engineering, and nuclear physics at George Washington University generated ascientific background to his beliefs in the human mind, although his studies did not earn him a degree. As a naval officer during World War 11, he suffered injuries thatleft him blind and crippled. During his recovery, he once again examined Freudian psychoanalytical theory and Eastern philosophies. He credits the eventual cure of his disabilities to his findings about the human mind during this time, findings that became the central elements of a religious doctrine he later called Dianetics.

An article on Dianetics was featured in the May 1950 issue of the popular magazine Astounding Science Fiction. The appearance of the article, coupled with the publication of Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health prompted a popular interest, particularly by those seeking an alternative to expensive sessions of psychotherapy, in the doctrine of Hubbard. In response to public demand, he founded the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation in late

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edulnnns/scientology.htmI 23/09/2003 .._ _ ------

The biography of L Ron Hubbard portrayed officially by the Church of Scientology is often ridiculed by critics for alleged inaccuracies. For example, sociologist Roy Wallis cites court transcripts contradicting claims of Hubbard's status a George Washington University student in his book The Road to Total Freedom. In an unusual twist, Wallis' book includes an appendix written by sociologist-and Scientologist-Jerry Simmons, which refutes much of whatWallis claims.

There are, in fact, many who have challenged the accuracy of the official bibliography. One doesn't have to look very hard on the Internet for examples. Paulette Cooper, a well-known Scientology apostate published her book entitled The Scandal ofScientology on-line. It devotes a full chapter to identifying claimed discrepancies and accuracies in the official biography.

The Church of Scientology often retaliates against what it says are false claims about Mr. Hubbard's biography. For example, in response to a series of articles published by the Boston Herald (whose link was unavailable at the time of the creation of this web page), they distributed a pamphlet entitled The Boston Herald: Merchant ofSensationalism. This rebuttal claims to address the inaccuracies of the articles-particularly those pertaining to the life of L. Ron Hubbard and the beliefs of Scientology.

7. History:

Upon the publication in 1950 of Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health, its author, L. Ron Hubbard, found an increasing interest by the public in his doctrine. Public interest in leamingmore about dianetics and auditing prompted Hubbard to establish the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International (HASI) in Phoenix, Arizona. In August 1952, the first Journal of Scientology was published to introduce techniques of auditing to cities around the United States. The publication also kept membersof HASI informed about its organization. The following month, Hubbard went to England to lecture on dianetics. Meanwhile, efforts in California to inform about dianetics prompted the formation of the first Church of Scientology in Los Angeles in 1954. Also around this time, there was expansion of Scientology in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the cities ofTel Aviv and Cairo. Due tothe increasing interest around theworld, Hubbard moved to Washington, D.C. in "July 1955 and established the Founding Church of Scientology and the first Academy of Scientology. Washington, D.e. also became the home to a distribution center where Scientology materials could be printed and then shipped around the world.

8. Sacred or Revered Texts:

Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health, a doctrinal book by founder L. Ron Hubbard and published in 1950, is the primary sacred text of Scientology. At the same time, members considered the numerous writings and lectures on dianetics, personal achievement, and human evaluation by Hubbard to be sacred as well. Sacred texts and symbols are protected by the Religious Technology Center, whose main purpose is to keep the doctrines and symbols identical to those originally conceived by Hubbard. The Church has often resorted to litigation in order to keep "Operating Thetan" materials secret and under its sole control. The court battles are primarily against Internet sites who publish these materials (see section on Current Events). The OT doctrines could

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.html 23/09/2003 be considered the most sacred scriptures in Scientology.

9. Cult or Sect:

Negative sentiments are typically implied when the concepts "cult" and "sect" are employed in popular discourse. Since the Religious Movements Homepage seeks to promote religious tolerance and appreciation of the positive benefits of pluralism and religious diversity in human cultures, we encourage the use of alternative concepts that do not carry implicit negative stereotypes. For a more detailed discussion of both scholarly and popular usage ofthe concepts "cult" and "sect," please visit our Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect" page, where you will find additional links to related issues.

1O. Size of Group:

There are multiple levels in which an individual can gain membership to the

Church of Scientology I thus making it difficult to generate an exact number of members. One can simply attend a Dianetics lecture, experience an auditing session, or pledge eternal allegiance to the prestigious Sea Organization, which includes over 5,000 members who occupy high staff positions in individual churches. 10 The number of Scientologists who have progressed beyond Clear and far along the OT- level "Bridge" is similarly small. An estimate of the magnitude of Scientology membership centers around 8 million, with over 3,000 churches established throughout the world. The number of Scientologists is most likely inflated, but if those who have hadcontact with Dianetics and . Scientology over the past 50 years were incorporated in the estimate, the total would almostcertainly be in the millions. .

11. Organization of the Group: .

The Church of Scientology offers many services to its members and nonmembers. The basic level of Scientology includes IHELP, an organization that helps field auditors minister outside the realm of the Church. The next level is SMI, Scientology Mission International, a mission effort by Scientologists to provide primary Dianetic and Scientologyservices. Churches, referred to as Class V organizations, conduct religious services and administer courses. Thirteen CelebrityCentres are located throughout the world and they provide all Class V services,alongside programs geared specifically towards artists. 12 Basic aUditing courses, as well as upper level training services, are provided in Saint Hill Organizations and Advanced Organizations. 13 The Flag Service Organization offers all religious services and a few upper-level courses. 14 The Flag Ship Service Organization is reserved for advanced Scientologists. The management of the Church of Scientology finds its place in the Church of Scientology International, headquartered in Los Angeles, CA. 15 Perhaps the most important organization in the Church is the Religious Technology Center, which ensures that Dianetic and Scientology doctrine is being taught truthfully and how Hubbard intended. 16 At the time this web page created, the Church of Scientology,as a whole, is lead by David Miscavige. 17

Scientology also controls a diverse group of organizations that advance its interests, either overtly or covertly. These include Narconon, a drug-abuse treatment program, Criminon, which aims to rehabilitate criminals, WISE (the World Institute of Scientology Enterprise), which promotes Scientology's applicability in the business world, the CCHR (Citizen's Commission on Human http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.htrol 23/09/2003 _ ------

Rights} that fights psychiatry (one of Scientology's avowed enemiesj.andthe Cult Awareness Reform Group (an anti-CAN group).

I Profile I Current Issues I Links I References I

11. Beliefs of the Group

From Dlanetics...

In the doctrine of Dianetics, 18 there is believed to be two components of the human mind: the Analytical and the Reactive. 19 The Analytical mind, similar to the concept of "ego" coined by Sigmund Freud, is the part of the mind that one knowingly utilizes, and one is consistently, consciously awareof this part of the mind. However, beneath the Analytical is the Reactive mind. During moments of troubling emotional and physical pain, the Analytical mind shuts down and the Reactive mind takes control of the functions commonly associated with the Analytical. During this time ofstress, the Reactivemind takes note of all the details happening, even though the individual maynot be consciously aware.

. .. . : . These "recordings" of the Reactive mind are "engrams," which Hubbard defined as a complete recollection ofevery 'perception occuring during unconsciousness. 20 Due to the unconscious nature of these engrams, an individual may not remember the traumaticexperience. Nevertheless, the engram remains firmly placedin mind of.the individual. to attain full human potential is considered to be the result of undeletect engrams. The personal therapy called" auditing" allows an individual to explore engrams, during which time the engrams are relived and then inactivated. An" auditor," considered a minister or minister-in-training in Scientology, conducts the auditing sessions and simply listens to the "preclear," a term associated with the individual receiving the auditing. 21 Just the auditor and preclear are in a quiet room with an E-meter (electropsychometer), which measures the energy of the mind created when it "pictures" an engram. 22 The preclear focuses on the engram the help of a process question from the auditor. 23

The objective ofauditing sessions is for an individual to befreeof any engrams.

When this occurs, individual is said to be It Clear"and the Analytical mind can now functionwithoutthe effects ofthe mind and its engrams. 24 Thousands of individuals have become Clear, thus gaining a greater understanding oftheir human potential. According to the Scientology document "The Bridge To ABetter Life," a clear witnesses "...the highest state of awareness as a spiritual being." 25

...to Scientology

Scientology brought a new focus to the doctrine of Hubbard, a focus that extended Dianetics into the realm of religious movements. 26 Hubbard advocated that man was neither a mind nor a body. The main concept of man's existence is the soul, a spiritual being . Hubbard called the sou," thetan", derived from the Greek letter meaning "thought." 27 In the words of sociologist William Bainbridge, a thetan is "analogous to the Christian notion of soul. All humans actually are thetans, immortal entities possessing virtually infinite powers." Individuals do not have thetans; they are considered thetans. Without

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.html 23109/2003 _ _ _

thetan, there would be no mind or body. Hubbard believed that thetan was the backbone of creation and life. '

Scientologists believe that the levels of Scientology beyond "clear" an individual to progress up the "bridge of total freedom"; freedom from physical constraints oftheir material bodies and the material universe, which Scientologists call MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, and Time). Scientologists who progress up the OT (Operating Thetan) Bridge may "know...immortality and freedom the cycle,of birth and death," according to " The State of Operating Thetan," a Church document. 28 Thus, the individual's goal in Scientology is to come into full awareness of his existence as a being who transcends Scientology, in sum, is a religious movement that professes to guide the journey of the individual towards a state of transcendent near

As Scientologists progress up the Bridge, they 'learn the details of Hubbard's cosmology, which articulates a many-trillion-year history similar to the ."galactic space opera" of Hubbard's prolific science-fiction efforts. Operating Thetan Level III (NOT a link to the actual document, but rather to an independent summary ofit), which details-how, when, and why humans came to Earth; is a good sample of this cosmology. 29 -- --

The symbol for Dianetics is shaped the Greek letter delta, with yellow stripes symbolizing life andfour green panels, representing four subdivisions of the urge for man's survival. The EightDynamics of Scientology continue Hubbard's examination into the importance of survival. The Eight Dynamics (in order) areSelf, Creativity, Group Survival, -Species, Life Forms, Physical Universe, Spiritual Dynamic, and Infinity. 30 Each of these pertains to the role of survival of each of these components. The Dynamics transcend throughout all of nature, including animals and vegetationand beyond.

I Profile I Current Issues I Links I References I

c Ill. Current Issues and Controversies

A Controversial Movement

I Internet I Usa McPherson I Germany I Fair Game I

Without a doubt, Scientology is one of the most controversial new religious movements in the modem world. Few other groups have been investigated and accused of wrongdoing at various times by so many government agencies (including the Internal Revenue Service, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation). Also, few other groups have received as much negative publicity as Scientology.

Significantly, much of this negative publicity comes from its legal battles with critics. In recent years, legal battles have focused on criticspublishing , - Scientology's sacred texts on the -lnternet. In 1999 a lawsuit involving copyright infringement was settled between the Church and Boulder, Colorado-based

http://religiollsmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.htmI - 23/09/2003 F.A.C.T. NET, Inc. 31 The suit included more than 1,900 copyright infringements and both sides have accumulated nearly $7 million in legal fees during the four year battle, according to an April 1 Denver Post article. F.A.C.T. NET, Inc. agreed to cease posting any works by L. Ron Hubbard or any Scientology organization on their site. Additionally, the Internet service must hand over any produced CD-ROM discs and other materials to the Church.

Update

At our request, the Church of Scientology International prepared an update on the status of their litigation against parties accused of copyright infringement. Their reply, Briefing Re: The Church of Scientology and the Internet (June 30, 2000) is reproduced here in its entirety.

Prior to this ruling, the Church of Scientology maintained its fierce aggressiveness against those publishing "sacred" texts on Internet sites. In September 1998, the Church was awarded $3 million dollars as the result of a lawsuit filed by the Church against Grady Ward, who will have to pay the Church of Scientology $200 per month and no longer post the texts on the Internet. Although Ward was never a member of Scientology, the Church does not stop their lawsuits with nonmembers of the Church. In San Jose, California, the Church filed a lawsuit against former Scientology minister Dennis Erlich, claiming that he participated in the publication of sacred texts on the Internet service NetcomOn-Line Communication Services.

Aside from Scientology's Internet battles over the distribution of secret Upper Level O'T materials, another recent controversy has been the treatment of the death of Usa McPherson, a Scientologist who was allegedly mistreated while in the care of Scientologists prior to her death in December 1995. In November 1998, criminal charges were filed against the Church. Affidavits filed with those charges claim that, in the 17 days prior to her death, McPherson was nursed by fellow Scientologists in a room at Scientology's Fort Harrison Hotel. 32 Also, the family of Usa McPherson has filed a wrongful death lawsuitin 1997 against the Church. The family has lead protests outside Fort Harrison'Hotet,

The Church pleaded innocent to these charges. 33 and aggressivelyattacked those responsible for bringing the charges. The Si. Petersburg Times claims that Scientologists toned down their rebuttal to the protests,particularly during a December 1998 protest. 34 Scientologist offensives in that case were the Times claims were "just verbal."

The Church battled a court order to release notes from auditing sessions with Usa McPherson. 35 The attorney representing the McPherson family in the wrongful death lawsuit requested the records be released. Church attorneys contend that the case could be tried without the auditing records and, furthermore, the records should be kept private. Auditing records, they claim, are as private as Catholic confessionals.

In a rare Si. Petersburg Times interview with David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology spoke about the death of Usa McPherson, among other things, and how he felt that critics of Scientology could not have been happier http://religiollsmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.html 23/09/2003 -

with the developments ofthis story. 36 The family and supporters of Usa McPherson created a webpage, where one could learn the latest about the case, albeit from an anti-Scientology view.

On February 22, 2000 the medical examiner ruled that Usa McPherson's death . was accidentaL The medical examiner had ealier ruled that the cause of death was "undetermined." Four months later, the State Attorney General dropped the criminal charges against the Church of Scientology. ·

In 1993, the Church Scientology gained tax-exempt status as a religion in the United States after a long-running legal battle with the Internal Revenue Service. However, the Church's ability to gain status as a religion in other nations around the world has not been as successful, particularly in Europe (link broken). 37 High-ranking officials with the Church have been arrested in countries such as France and Italy.

The Church ofScientology has faced its greatest opposition Germany, where, according to the Associated Press, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl's government believes Scientology is a threat to Germany's democracy. Also, the Church is considered an enterprise and German Scientologists are prohibited from public jobs under close surveillance. The United States Department of State issued a highly critical report summarizing problems of religious freedom in Germany. 38

Numerous commissions have been organized in Germany, not only to investigate Scientology but other religious movements as welL The German government classifies these groups as possible "sects and pyscho-groups." The . commissions continue to investigate Scientologists in Germany. A final report on cults by the German commission created by the Bundestag was issued 'in June 1998. 38 Prior to the release of this report, six German professors issued an essay condemning the German State for "once more taking part in the defamation of and discrimination against religious and ideological minorities." 40 The professors cite bias among the members of the Enquiry Commission and inadequacies in the commission's interim report.

c The Church of Scientology has utilized its high-profile membership of celebrities to gain the support of members of Congress in its battle against the treatment of Scientoloqists in Germany. A total of 34 celebrities, not -all of are members of the Church, signed a letter sent to Chancellor Kohl protesting the treatment of Scientologists in Germany. 41 There are also numerous court decisions, 42 on all levels of German courts, proclaiming that Scientology should be recognized as religion in accordancewith Article4 43 of the German Constitution.

In the past, action against perceived "threats" to Scientology has even been extra-legaL In 1980, Scientologists from the para-military Guardian's Office, including L. Ron Hubbard's wife, were convicted and sentto federal prison after infiltrating, bugging, and stealing thousands of Scientology-related documents . from federal agencies, foreign embassies, and other organiiations critical of Scientology in Washington, D.C. 44 Scientology often coordinates litigation and harassment of its most vocal critics through its Office of Special Affairs, the "enforcement" arm of the movement that succeeded the old Guardian's Office. Scientology's harassment of critics and apostates (which has in many cases only made them fight harder) is the logical extension of a doctrine formulated by http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.htmI 23/09/2003 Hubbard in the 1960s, which he called Fair Game." 45 Very simply, this doctrine declares that enemies of the Church "May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologists. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed" (from Hubbard's original Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter). Though the Church officially states that it no longer advocates "fair game," its actions continue to prove otherwise.

I IBeliefs I Current Issues I Unks I References I

IV. Links to Church of Scientology Web Sites

Pro-Scientology

Scientology: Applied Religious Philosophy This is the official web site of the Church of Scientology. A history of Scientology and its founder, L. Ron Hubbard, are given, along with statistics on church membership. Focus is also placed on the role of Scientologistsaround world. There is a bookstore containing Scientology texts and links to other Scientology web sites. http://www.sciento/ogy.org

· Scientology Members Online InMarch of 1998, members of the Church of Scientology were encouraged to create individual web sites, complete with a major emphasis on their success with the Church. Over 15,000 Scientologists have uploaded web sites onto the Internet. The sites give personal information about the member and his/her favoritelinks to other Scientology- related web sites. http://on-/ine.sciento/ogy.org

L. Ron Hubbard Homepage The many facets of the life of Scientology founder, L. Ron Hubbard, are presented, alongside letters and journals written by Hubbard. Hubbard's life as a humanitarian, philosopher, and yachtsman are explored, as well as other traits. There is a link to a bookstore where one can visit his works. Tbispage is also a jumping off point to other sites related toL. Ron Hubbard. http://www./ronhubbard.org

Leisa Goodman's Homepage Leisa Goodman is the Director of Media Relations for the Church of Scientology International in Los Angeles, CA. Her web site highlights Church publlcatlons and Scientology's Freedom magazine. There is no information on Scientology's doctrines but there is a link to the home paqe. http://www.theta.comlgoodman

Scientology Codes and Creeds Taken from "What is Scientology?" an official publication of the Church, the information on this web site provides answers to frequently asked questions about the beliefs of Scientology. The codes and creeds of Scientology are presented. htfp:llwww.lib.ox.ac.uklinternetJnewslfaqlarchivelscientology.users.codes_and_ creeds.htm/

http://religiollsmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrmslscientology.htrnl 23/09/2003 Scientology's Freedom Magazine , Published by the Church ofScientology, it provides information on Scientology itself and other issues pertaining to "public interest," as stated on the opening page. The publication is presented for foreign countries, including England, France, Italy, and Germany, as well. Also, there are multiple issues for the United States, including a Los Angeles publication. http://www.freedommag.org

Citizens Commission Human Rights This site presents an argument against psychiatry, a debate lead by the works of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. There is one specific link to an article about the feelings of Scientologist towards psychiatrists and the "abuse" they inflict, according to Scientologists. http://www.cchr.org

New Era Dianetics Changes by L. Ron Hubbard to his original Dianetics doctrine prompted the rise of New Era Dianetics. This site devotes time to explaining these "expanded Dianetics," focusing on aUditing and attaining the state of Clear. One can access the Dianetics home page and other related sites. http://www.neweradianetics.org.uk

Scientology Missions International Scientology Missions International is located throughout the world and one can find a mission close to him/her usinqthe site's globallocator. One can also find information about L. Ron Hubbard and his letters and journals relating to his discoveries of Dianetics. There is also information about the goals and objectives of Scientology. http://www.smi.org

About Scientology AUditing Auditing is a fundamental practice of Scientologists and this site devotes itself to telling about the practice of auditing its relationship to Scientology as a whole. The site is maintained by the Church in the same fashion as its homepage. http://wWw.auditing.org

German Court Decisions Favoring Church of Scientology This site gives excerpts from German courtopinions in favor of Scientology. Scientology is engaged in a long-running battle with German officials over gaining recognition as an official religion. The excerpts on this site come from decisions that rely upon Article 4 of the German Constitution in finding that Scientology deserves to be considered a religion. http://www.religioustolerance.org/scieyos.htm

PURIFICATION Body Detoxification Program Scientologists advocate lifestyles free from all types of The Church administers a program, Narconon, which helps drug addicts overcome their habit. Narconon is church-affiliated but also helps people from outside the church. This site focuses on Narconon, along with articles promoting the benefits of a drug-free lifestyle. http://mobileminister.com/purif ,

Analytical Pages http://religiollsmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.html' 23/09/2003 rvrovemems V.l

Scientology Profile on Religioustolerance.org Part of the overall religious tolerance web site, this page gives an unbiased view of Scientology. Beliefs, practices, programs, and important dates are among the information presented in an abbreviated, outlined format. Also, a documentation is presented of the numerous battles engaged in by the Scientologists with groups in the United States and countries around the world. http://www.religioustolerance.org/scientol.htm

"The Scientology Story Angles Times series) Between June 24-29, 1990, the Los Angeles Times printed a six-part series on the Church of Scientology. Its authors, Joet Sappell and Robert W. Welkos, explored the founding of the Church, L. Ron Hubbard, and Scientology's present-day battles with outsiders. Each day a new topic was addressed and there are individual links to each day's story. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/-dst/Library/Shelf/la90/la90-0.html

Inside the Church of Scientology Inside the Church of Scientology is a five part Boston Herald investigative report. While the series contains a lot of information, much of the tntrepretatlon of the information draws from the perspective of some of the nastiest of Scientology critics. " http://www.bostonherald.com/scientology/

"Scientology is Refused Registration as a Charity in England" This news story on the ruling of the Charity Commission of England and Wales on December 9,1999 apears on the Cesnur web site. http://www.cesnur.orgltesti/charity.htm

Anti-Scientology

Karin Spaink's Homepage Karin Spaink, the creator of this web page, is one of the persons sued by the Church of Scientology for copyright infringement. http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink c An Introduction to Scientology . Although this site first claims to be an introduction, further investigation proves that this site offers extensive links and articles about Scientology, ranging from practices to current events. Some parts of the site are factual and unbiased towards Scientology; however, most of the links are to sites considered anti Sciente>logy. http://www.modemac.com/cos

Operation Clambake - The Inner Secrets of Scientology Operation Clambake is a web page devoted to the negative aspects of Scientology. The site is well-organized into diverse categories, from articles about the Church and the court to personal accounts of Scientology to links to other anti-Scientology sites. This site also attempts to bring humor to the battle against Scientology with links to cartoons and parodies. http://www.xenu.net

FACTNet International Homepage According to the "Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network," this site is a"non source, referral service, archive protecting freedom of mind from http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.html 23/09/2003 harms caused by psychological coercion." FACTNet's web site contains a daily newswire and information about cults and coercion. It does focus on other religious movements besides Scientology. http://www.factnet.org

German Scientology News The heated debate over Scientology in Germany.is the main topic of this web site maintained by an individual not affiliated with any other Scientology . organization. There translated from German into English. The point of this web site is to offer information about Scientology's presence in Germany and give the details without fear of being sued. http://www.cisar.org

Scientology: Cult of Greed and Power The greed presentin the Church of Scientology is the focus of this web page. There are links other anti-Scientology sites listed here and stories from ex Scientologists. There are books archived on this site that the Church has tried to ban from pubtication. This site is consistently under construction so it changes frequently. http://www.entheta.net

NOTS Scholars Homepage (Scientology) An excellent pagethat contains detailed, informative summary and review of the New Operating Thetan Scientology scriptures. This site has a link to obtain the actual scripture from the Swedish parliament, who has been given permission by the Swedish Supreme Court to make the documents public. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/-dst/NOTs/index.html

Watchman ExpositorArticles on Scientology Multiple articles, categorized in numerous volumes, about topics ranging from Scientology's Internet wars to the controversial death of Usa McPherson make up this site. The articles generate a counter-cult argument against the Church. The Watchman Fellowship is a major evangelical counter-cult organization. http://www.watchman.org/scienta.htm

Usa McPherson Memorial Page Usa McPherson wasa Scientologist whose death has prompted numerous civil suits claiming that the Church abused her and ignored her fatal symptoms. This site is mirrored on http://www./isamcpherson.org and contains such interesting articles as McPherson's autopsy report. There is also a link to the page on http://www.freedommag.org that presents the Scientology side of the McPherson story. http://www./isamcpherson.org/

Critical Information about Scientology . Jeff Jacobson, a critic of the Church of Scientology, gives personal experiences with Scientologists and research he has conducted on the group. He offers a copy of the text of his book on Hubbard's discoveries. There are also links to various Scientology- related web pages, particularly to those pertaining to the conflicts Scientolagy has been engaged in in recent years. http://www.primenet.com/-cultxpt/cos.htm

NOTs on the Net This web page focuses on the issue of Operating Thetan materials appearing on http://religiolismovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.html 23/09/2003 - - - - - , - .

the Internet and Scientology's fight to remove the sacred texts. There are synopses of lawsuits initiated by the Church againstthose sites having do 'with the sacred materials being posted for see. Some synopses have links to a more detailed description of the case. http://www.modemac.com/nots

Extracts and Analysis of Scientology Scriptures The title ofthissitesums up whatit offers viewers. Specifically, there are . excerpts from lectures-and writings ofL. Ron Hubbard and an interesting extract from the Church's official publication WhatisScientology?, complete with comments in parentheses claiming lies present in the text. http://starbase.neosoft.com/-dcS/posts/pulpindx.html

Social Control in Scientology This site presents a book, primarily published on the Internet,written by Bob Penny, who is one of founders of FACTNet, a group crusading against coercive tactics of new religious movements. The text focuses on the destructive nature of Scientology and the group's ethics. http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/xenu/scs.html

The Church of Scientology vs. the Net The primary focus of this site is the ongoing war between Scientologists and the Internet. There are links to developing events in the battle. There also news articles and links to other anti-Scientology sites. http://www2.thecia.net/users/mewmanlscientology/home.htmll

The Web Page of Total Freedom Written under anonymity, the author ofthis site, a auditor in the Church, agrees with some aspects of Scientologybut focuses more on what he disagrees with primarily the Religious Technology Center. However,.one must move deeper into the site to seethe author's distlkesbecause the page begins with definitions of Scientologytermsand appears to beascholarly site. ·· http://www.igs.net/- michaelv/scnreform.htm

I Profile I Beliefs I Current Issues I Links I References I

IV. References

Books

Bednarowski, Mary Farrell. 1989. New Religions and the Theological Imagination in America. Bloomington. IN: Indiana University Press.

Church of Scientology. 1998. Theology &Practice ofa Contemporary Religion: $ciento/ogy. Los Angeles, CA: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Church of Scientology. 1994. The Scientology Handbook. Los Angeles, CA: Bridge PUblications, Inc.

Church of Scientology.1992. What is Scientology? Los Angeles, CA: Bridge Publications, Inc.

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.html 23/09/2003 Hubbard, L. Ron. 1987. Dianetics, the Modem Science ofMental Health: a Handbook ofDianetics Procedure. Los Bridge Publications.

Melton, J. Gordon. 2000. The Church ofScientology. Signature Books in cooperation with CESNUR (Center for Studies on New Religions).

Wallis, Roy. 1976. The Road to Total Freedom: A Sociological Analysis ofScientology. London: Heinemann.

Articles

Bainbridge, William Sims and Rodney Stark. 1980. "Scientology: To Be Perfectly Clear." Sociological Analysis .41 :2, 128-136.

Bainbridge, William Sims. "Science and Religion: The Case of Scientology," In David G. Bromley and Phillip E. Hammond, eds. The Future ofNew Religious Movements. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press. 59-79.

Bainbridge, William Sims. 1997. The Sociology ofReligious Movements. New York: Routledge. See concluding chapter, "The Perpetual System." 395-422.

Bednarowski, Mary Farrel!. 1995. "The Church of Scientology: lightening Rod for Cultural Boundary Conflicts," in Timothy Miller, ed.,America's Altemative Religions. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 385-392.

Bromley, David G. and Mitchell L. Bracey, Jr. 1998. "The Church of Scientology: A Quasi-Religion," in William W. Zellner and Marc Petrowsky, eds. Sects, Cults, and Spiritual Communities: A Sociological Analysis. Westport, CT: Praeger. 141-156.

Wallis, Roy. 1973. "The Sectarianism of Scientology," in Michael Hill, ed., A Sociological Yearbook of Religion in Britain. London: SCMPress. 136 155.

Wallis. Roy.1987. "Hostage to Fortune: Thoughts on the Future of Scientology and the Children of God," in Bromley, David G.and Phillip E. Hammond, eds. The Future of Religious Movements. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press. 59-79.

I Profile I Beliefs I Current Issues I Unks I References I

Footnotes

1. Meaning of Scientotogy http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/wis/wiseng/wis4.;6/wis42.htm 2. Life of L. Ron Hubbard http://aboutlronhubbard.org/eng/wis3_1s.htm 3. life of L. Ron Hubbard http://www.scientology.de/wis/wiseng/29/wis291b.htm" 4. Chapter 20 of The Scandal ofScientology http ://www.cs.cmu.edu/-dstllibrary/Shelf/cooper 20.html 5. The BostonHerald: Merchant ofSensationalism http://news.scientology.org/mag/boston/pageOO.htm 6. Church of Scientology in Los Angeles http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/world/wortdeng/vrla/ladayt01 .htm 7. Founding Church of Scientology http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/world/wortdeng/21/dc1 .htm 8. Religious Technology Center http://www.scientology.orgIWORLDIWORLDENG/corp/rtc.htm

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edulnnns/scientology.html 23109/2003 xeugrous rviovernems UJ •• •.

9. Applied Religious Philosophy http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/fore.htm 10. Sea Organization http://fag;scientology.org/so.htm 11. Number of Scientologists http://www.religioustolerance.org/scientol.htm 12. Celebrity Centres http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/world/worleng/21/cc01.htm 13. Saint Hill OrganIzations and Advanced Organizations http://www.scientology.org/world/worldeng/tours/eutour.htm 14. Flag Service Organization http://ww.N.scientology.org/pjpg/world/worlderig/21/fsso.htm 15. Church of Scientology International http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/world/worldeng/vrla/ladayt01.htm .16. Religious Technology Center http://www.scientology.org/WORLD/WORLDENG/corp/rtc.htm 17. David Miscavige http://www.sptimes.comlTampaBay/102598/scientologypart1.html 18. Doctrine of Dianetics http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/wis/wiseng/wis4-6/wis44.htm 19. Analytical and Reactive Mind http://www.scientology.org/p jpg/wis/wiseng/wis4 6/wis4 6.htm 20. Engrams http://wpxx02.toxLuni-wuerxburg.de/-kraseI/CoS/dianeticstest.html 21. Auditor http://leam;scientology.org/wis54.htm 22.E-meter http://www.lronhubbard.org/pjpg/book/html/r114m.htm 23. Process Question http://Ieam.scientology.org/wis57.htm 24. Clear http://www.auditing.org/13-clear.htm 25. The Bridge To A Better Life http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/wis/wiseng/wis4-6/wis61.htm 26. Scientology http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/wis/wiserig/wis4-6/wis43.htm 27. Thetan http://www.scientology.org/pjpg/wis/wiseng/wis4-6/wis411.htm 28. The State of Operating Thetan http://www.auditing.org/13-0t.htm 29. Operating Thetan Level III http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink/cos/commentsnaots.html 30. Eight Dynamics http://fag.scientology.ca/dynamics.htm 31. F.A.C.T. NET, Inc. Settlement http://wwwJactnet.org/Scientology/settle.html 32. McPherson Death Charges http://www.sptimes.com/TampaBay/120198/Churchpleadsinnocen.html 33. Church Pleads Innocent http://www.sptimes.com/TampaBay/120198/Churchpleadsinnocen.html 34. December 1998 Protest http://www.sptimes.com/SouthPinellas/120698/McPhersonrelatives12.html 35. Release of McPherson Auditing Session htto://www.sptimes.com/News/31699/TampaBay/Scientology .toldtor.html 36. David Miscavige Interview http://www.sptimes.com/TampaBay/102598/scientologyguotes.htmI 37. No Acceptance in Europe http://www.sptimes.com/News/32999/Worldandnation/Abroad_Criticsyubli.html 38. United States State Department Report http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/nationprofiles/Germany.html#summary 39. Final Report http://www.cesnur.org/ENDBER.HTM 40. Professors' Essays http://www.cesnur.org/SixProfessors.htm 41. Celebrity Letter http://wpxx02.toxLuni-wuerzburg.de/-krasel/CoS/da/da germany20.htrnl 42. Favorable German Court Decisions http://www.religioustolerance.org/sciepos.htm Article 4 of German Constitution http://www.religious-freedom.org/vgerniany.html 44. Guardian's Office http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink/LRH-bio/goI58.htm 45. Fair Game http://www.sky.neU-sloth/sci/hubbard fair game.html

Created by Laura Chamblin For Soc 257: New Religious Movements Spring Term, 1999 Last Modified: 24/03/01

Originally created by Craig W. Hirsch. Portions of his research and writing have been retained in this page. Hirsh's original page is available in the Religious Movement Archives.

http ://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.html 23/09/2003 -J - -r----·- -

UNITED NATIONS

Economic and Social Distr. Council GENERAL

E/CNA/1998/6/Add.2. December 1997

ENGLISH Original: FRENCH

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-fourth session Item 18 of the provisional agenda

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECLARATION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF INTOLERANCE AND OFDISCRIMINATION BASED ON RELIGION ORBELIEF

Report submitted by Mr. Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur, in accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 1996/23 Addendum

Visit to Germany

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

I. LEGISLATION RELATING TO TOLERANCE AND NON-DISCRIMINATION IN THE FIELD OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

A. General constitutional guarantees relating to freedom of religion and belief

B. Constitutional guarantees specific to relations between the State, religion and belief

C. Constitutional guarantees specific to cults

11. IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION AND POLICY RELATING TO TOLERANCE AND NON-DISCRIMINATION IN THE FIELD OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

A. Situation with regard to religion and belief

B. Situation of religious minorities

C. Other groups and communities in the field of and belief

\ " D. Church of Scientology :/ ';

http://www.unhchr.chIHuridocda/Huridoca.nsffTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 - rrr > _ nI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION

1. From 17 to 27 September 1997,the Special Rapporteur on the question ofreligious intolerance, in accordance with his mandate, visited Germany at the invitation ofthe German Government.

2. In the course ofhis visit, the Special Rapporteur travelled to Berlin (17, 18 and 20 September), Potsdam (19 September), Lutherstadt-Wittemberg (21 September), Magdeburg (21 September), (22-24 and 27 September), Munich (27 September), Karlsruhe (26 September) and Frankfurt (27 September). .

3. He held talks with official representatives at the federal and Land levels, including senior political leaders and senior officials and experts in the fields offoreign affairs, justice, the interior, labour and social affairs, education, youth and sports, science, research and culture, finance, the family and women, and elderly persons. Consultations were also held with members ofparliament, presidents of parliaments, including the President ofthe Bundestag, and members ofthe German Bundestag's Study Commission on sects and so-called psycho-groups, and with the Federal Constitutional Court and Federal Labour Court.

4. The Special Rapporteur also talked to representatives ofthe Catholic and Protestant Churches and the Jewish, Orthodox and Muslim minorities, and with the Bhagwans, Baha'is, Hare Krishnas, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Church ofUnification and the Church ofScientology. Non governmental organizations, in particular those providing assistance to victims ofsects and psycho groups, and academics and eminent independent persons were also consulted. Places ofworship were visited.

5. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thank the German authorities for their excellent cooperation during the preparations for the visit and during the visit itself. He is also very grateful to the various senior governmental and non-governmental spokesmen whom he met.

6. During his visit the Special Rapporteur devoted particular attention to the study oflegislation relating to tolerance and non-discrimination in the field ofreligion or belief, its enforcement and the policy in force. [back to the contents] .

1. LEGISLATION TO TOLERANCE AND IN THE FIELD OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

A. General constitutional guarantees relating to freedom ofreligion and belief

7. Freedom ofre ion and beliefis guaranteed by article 4 ofthe Constitution in the following terms:

"(1) The freedomofbeliefand conscience and the freedom to profess religious and philosophical beliefs are inviolable.

"(2) The free practice ofworship is guaranteed."

8. This freedom comprises both the individual right of each person to believe in what he wants and the right not to have a belief. It also embodies the right to behave in accordance with one's belief. In addition, article 4, paragraph 3, ofthe Constitution recognizes the right ofconscientious objection to military service.

9. Article 4 ofthe Constitution does not expressly impose restrictions on these rights and freedoms

regards their manifestations, but obviously they do not annlv.. without limits. These limits orizinate http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsflTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974cI25660... ·14/08/2003 - - - from the implications ofthe Constitution, notably concerning the protection ofthe .fundamental rights ofothers (cf. protection ofhuman dignity, Constitution, art. 1, and right to life and physical integrity Constitution, art. 2, para. 2) or relating to guarantees for common property specially protected by the Constitution. These limits must not be disproportionate to the goals pursued. [back to the contents]

B. Constitutional guarantees specific to relations between the State, religion and belief

10. The constitutional guarantee ofreligious freedom is supplemented and spelled out by article 140 ofthe Constitution, which incorporates articles 136, 137, 138 and 141 ofthe Weimar Constitution of 11 August 1919 and regulates relations between the State, the Churches and religious coinmunities. ill Article 7, paragraphs 2 and 3, ofthe Constitution guarantees religious instruction in State schools.

11. As reflected in the constitutional provisions since the Weimar Constitution, a separation between religions and the State has been introduced. However,these provisions do not establish the principle ofan absolute excluding all possibility ofcooperation between religion and State. A substantial degree ofcooperation has been maintained and manifests itselfin various ways: granting ofthe status ofa legal person in public law, protection ofchurch property intended for religious purposes, guarantees to religious entities recognized as public-law communities ofthe right to levy taxes, practice ofworship in the army, hospitals,prisons and other public institutions, and religious instruction State schools. The rights and advantages arising from this cooperation and benefiting religions with the status ofa legal person in public law, including the Catholic and Protestant Churches, are sometimes perceived, notably by authorities in the Lander ofthe former German Democratic Republic (GDR) and by minority groups and communities in the field ofreligion and belief, as privileges accorded by the State to the major Churches (such asthe levying oftax. by the public authorities for the benefit ofthe major Churches, which are sometimes called lithechurches of officialdom"). However, as stated below in section C, these advantages are not related to the religious character ofthe Church, but to recognition ofthe fact that it is in the public interest. Other religions recognized as being in the public interest, including that ofthe Jewish also enjoy these rights. In addition, in the specific case ofthe Protestant and Catholic Churches (the latter formerly having had their assets confiscated without payment ofthe prescribed indemnity), the benefits granted tend to be regarded as compensation.

iz. The principle ofneutrality ofthe State remains, in spite ofwhat has been said above, particularly important in Germany. The does not, in fact, have to identify itselfwith any religious or philosophical beliefor to encourage any particular sympathy - or antipathy - towards it. Moreover, the State does not have to judge the intrinsic value or truth ofany religion orbelief This principle of neutrality also requires a fundamental attitude oftolerance and equitable treatment ofall religious and philosophical groups within the context and limits ofthe public interest. The principle ofState neutrality, associated with the principle ofpositive separation ofthe State and the Church, which cooperate in certain fields, sometimes encounters difficulties ofinterpretation in certain Lander, in connection, for example, with the question ofreligion in State schools, whether it concerns the crucifix case or religious education.

13. In the crucifix case in Bavaria, the Federal Constitutional Court, in its so-called "crucifix decision" (of 16 May 1995), declared an internal primary school regulation incompatible with article 4, paragraph 1, ofthe Constitution and accordingly rescinded that inter alia invoking the State's duty ofneutrality. According to this decision, the placing ofa cross or crucifix on the wall ofa classroom in a State school, other than a religious school, constitutes a breach ofthe provisions ofthis article ofthe Constitution. However, the Bavarian authorities, expressing their disagreement this point, have enacted a law on teaching and education which is perceived as a compromise solution. In accordance with article 7 ofthis law, given the historical and cultural characteristics ofBavaria a cross may be present in State schools, in order that the objectives ofthe Constitution with regard to the realization ofChristian and Western values may be attained, while

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsflTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974cI25660... 14/08/2003 --- - preserving freedom ofbelief. Ifthe presence ofthis cross is challenged on serious and reasonable grounds relating to faith and belief, an understanding must be sought. Ifno agreement is arrived at, the head ofthe school must try to resolve each individual case with a view to ensuring respect for the freedom ofbeliefofthe parties and in such a way that the beliefs ofall persons are considered in a balanced manner and, to the fullest extent possible, the will ofthe majority is taken into consideration. This law has been ratified by the Bavarian Constitutional Court and submitted to the Federal Constitutional Court. The Bavarian authorities have stated that, since the decision ofthe Federal Court, out ofnine challenges in primary schools four have resulted in the withdrawal ofthe crucifix and four in a compromise; the other case proceedings are still under way. In secondary schools, out offour challenges two resulted in withdrawal ofthe crucifix and the two others in a compromise. It should be noted that the authorities ofthe Lander in the former GDR, religious feelings cannot be said to run high, interpret the presence ofthe crucifix in State schools as contrary to the neutrality ofthe State.

14. In accordance with article 7, paragraphs 2 and 3, oftheConstitution, religious education is guaranteed in State schools. It financed by the State, which provides the necessary teachers, while the content ofthe education is the responsibility ofthe Churches. Religious instruction, which in accordance with article 7 ofthe Constitution is an ordinary subject in almost all State schools, cannot be treated as a secondary or optional subject. However, in the Lander ofthe former GDR, this constitutional provision sometimes creates problems because ofthe verylimited concern with religious matters. The authorities are fact discussing the status ofreligious education in State schools, which some people consider should be optional. An exception to the Constitution is therefore desired in some quarters, notably in order to ensure greater neutrality ofthe State. However, in the Land ofBrandenburg, parents ofschoolchildren have initiated legal proceedings against the authorities in order to secure the establishment ofreligious instruction as an integral part ofthe curriculum, in accordance with article 7 ofthe Constitution.

15. The interpretation ofthe constitutional guarantees relating to the State in the area ofreligion and beliefcontinues to attract attention and arouse discussion.

16. As has already been noted, the principle ofneutrality is not equivalent to indifference on the part ofthe State This is apparent through the limits on freedom ofreligion and beliefas described section A. According to the constitutional law in force, the mere fact that community lays claim to a particular religion and regards itselfas a religious community does not, ipso facto, create the right to exercise the freedom set forth in article 4, paragraphs 1 and 2, ofthe Constitution. According to the German authorities, there in fact be a religion or a religious community characterized by a spiritual basis and its external manifestation. It is for the public authorities, in the final analysis the courts, to verify the justification for challenges in the event ofa dispute. The intervention ofthe State remains a possibility, particularly in the area ofcriminal proceedings when there is a suspicion ofunlawful activities concealed, actually or falsely, by questions ofreligion or belief, since these questions do not in themselves have to be the subject ofany substantive assessment. [back to the contents]

C. Constitutional guarantees specific to cults

17. As regards the status ofcults, in accordance with article 140 ofthe Constitution (Weimar Constitution, art. 137, para. 2), a cult is granted, through the procedures in force, the status ofa legal person in public law when, in the light ofits statute and the size ofits membership, it gives every indication ofdurability. Other cults acquire legal capacity in private law.

18. The status oflegal person in public law gives rise to certain rights, in particular the right to levy church taxes through the services ofthe State and the right to tax advantages and exemptions (notably exemption from corporate tax, land tax and inheritance tax) and exemptionsfrom regulations on costs and tariffs. The authorities emphasize that these advantages and exemptions are granted not because ofthe religious character ofthe cult, but because it servesthe public interest. http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsf/TestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 19. In any application for public-law status, it is also necessary to take account ofthe conditions specified in article 140 ofthe Constitution and to ensure respect for the legal order ofthe State. This additional condition originates from the decision of26 June 1997 rendered by the Federal Administrative Tribunal in the so-called Jehovah's Witnesses case. The Tribunal decided that the Jehovah's Witnesses could not be recognized as a legal person in public law. According to that decision, public-law status comprises, for the religious entities concerned, an offer ofcooperation by the State, which thus grants privileges that are normally reserved for itselfalone. This cooperation is intended to benefit the religious question to the extent that its activities contribute to the service ofthe State and to the public interest. Consequently, this religious entity must not call in question the foundations ofthe State. According to the Tribunal, the Jehovah's Witnesses, through their blanket refusal to take part in public elections, are opposed to the principle ofdemocracy. However, under the Constitution, the public legitimacy essential for public action is primarily conferred through elections, and notably parliamentary elections. By refusing in principle to take part in this manifestation ofpublic life, the Jehovah's Witnesses the basic legitimization ofthe State and, consequently, cannot be recognized as a community in publiclaw. The German authorities, including the Federal Minister ofLabour and Social Affairs, have nevertheless stressed that the withholding ofsuch status did not signify non-recognition ofthe Jehovah's Witnesses as a religious community. The Jehovah's Witnesses have, however, exercised their right ofappeal to the Federal Constitutional Court (see II.C).

20. In the case ofthe applications by the Church ofScientology for the granting ofpublic-law status, Supreme Court decisions are still pending. In the course ofone procedure, the Federal Labour Court has had to deal with the question whether a Scientology employee was a worker within the meaning ofthe right to work. In this context, the Court decided that the Scientology organization an economic undertaking(see II.D).

21. Recognition ofthe status oflegal person in public law is a question also facing Muslims and, according to the authorities, is being hampered by the absence ofa single spokesman for the whole ofthis community (see ILB).

22. Apart from the question ofthe status ofcults, the Constitution, in article 140 (Weimar Constitution, art. 137, para. 3), guarantees the right to freedom ofmanagement. Every cult can deal with its own affairs in an autonomous manner, irrespective ofits legal status. This autonomy applies to religious education, appointment to office, religious service and the organization ofcharitable activities. [back to the contents]

n. IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION AND POLICY RELATING TO TOLERANCE AND NON-DISCRIMINATION IN THE FIELD OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

23. The Special Rapporteur has endeavoured to give a description ofthe situation with regard to religion and belief, and to examine the situation ofreligious minorities, and other groups and communities in the field ofreligion and belief, and the situation ofthe Church ofScientology. [back to the contents]

A. Situation with regard to religion and belief

24. The Special Rapporteur was unable to obtain recent statistics on the religion or beliefofGermans or persons living in Germany, since no official statistics are compiled on these questions.

25. According to estimates gathered by the Special Rapporteur, Christianity constitutes the majority religion by number ofbelievers. The Protestant and Catholic churches are estimated to comprise 28.5 million and 27.5 million members respectively, other words about 35 per cent ofthe population for each Church.

http://www.unhchr.chIHuridocdalHuridoca.nsfrrestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 ------

26. In this connection, a distinction should be made between the religious situation in the Lander of the former Federal Republic ofGermany (FRG) and in those ofthe former GDR. The reunification ofGermany has had its repercussions on the state ofreligions and beliefs because ofthe limited concern with religion in the Lander ofthe former GDR.

27. The two major Churches are reported to have experienced not only a sharp decrease in religious worship, but also a decline in membership in recent years.

28. However, the Catholic and Protestant churches continue to be the dominant Churches in Germany, historically linked to the State, and subjected to a positive separation under the Weimar Constitution and the subsequent Constitution ensuring cooperation with the public authorities in common affairs, in accordance with their status as legal persons in public law (cf. Part LB and C).

29. On the question ofreligious minorities, the Muslim community, whose ethnic origins are diverse (North Africa, Middle Asia) but mostly Turkish, is estimated to number 2.5 to 3 million. It should be noted that this figure includes some 100,000 native Germans, Muslims manifestly represent the largest religious minority in Germany

30. There has reportedly been a substantial increase in the size ofthe Jewish community, which had about 50,000 members in 1994 (Statistisches Bundesamt, Statistisches Jahrbuch 1995), owing to the arrival ofmany Jews form the former Soviet Union (see paragraph 36 below).

31. The Orthodox community, which is ofvery varied ethnic origin (Armenians, Bulgars, Copts, Greeks, Romanians, Serbo-Croats), is estimated at approximately 1 million members.

32. The estimated membership ofthe other groups and communities in the field ofreligion and belief is given below:

Jehovah's Witnesses 180000 members

Mormons 39 000 members

Baha'is 6 000 members

Hare Krishna 5 000 members

Unification Church 850 members

The Church ofScientology states that it has 30,000 members.

33. Lastly, the number ofpeople belonging to no religion is estimated at 16 million. [back to the contents]

, B. Situation ofreligious minorities

(a) Jewish minority

34. The Jewish community enjoys a privileged situation in the area ofreligious freedom. It has the status ofa legal person in public law and therefore enjoys the rights and benefits deriving therefrom. The religious instruction ofJudaism is guaranteed. Private schools and places ofworship exist in sufficient numbers. For the purposes ofthe broadcasting ofreligious programmes, the Jewish community has the right to appropriate broadcasting time on the public and private radio networks throughout the country. It also has the right ofrepresentation on the broadcasting control bodies, in accordance with the legal provisions on broadcasting.

. http://www.unhchr.chIHuridocdaIHuridoca.nsflTestFramelOb1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 ...- -r --

35. Public fmancial assistance is granted to the Jewish community. In the Land ofSaxony-Anhalt, for example, in 1997 public funds amounting to DM 1,619,223 were paid to the Regional Association ofJewish Communities.

36. Special measures have also been taken by the authorities for the benefit ofJews coming from the former Soviet Union. On 9 January 1991, the heads ofgovernment ofthe Federation and the Lander decided to facilitate the entry ofJewish emigrants from the former Soviet Union, without limitation as to numbers. Admission is effected pursuant to the law concerning measures to be taken with regard to refugees admitted in the context ofhumanitarian assistance (law on refugees subject to quota). The desire ofthe authorities is to permit the maintenance ofJewish communities in Germany. As of30 June 1997,64,971 persons were reported to have entered Germany under the above-mentioned procedure, in addition to the 8,535 persons who arrived at an earlier stage, or outside that procedure. These Jewish immigrants receive integration assistance, the cost ofwhich is borne by the Bund.

37. As was stated by Mr. Ignatz Bubis, representative ofthe Jewish community, Jews in Germany are not subjected to any official discrimination. Some acts ofvandalism have nevertheless been reported, including the desecration ofJewish cemeteries. The number ofthese incidents, which are attributable to extreme-right groups, neverthelessremained stable in 1997. The Special Rapporteur was also informed ofintemal problems in the Jewish community, namely, the integration within the community ofJews fromthe former Soviet Union who had virtually no knowledge ofthe tenets and practice ofJudaism. To sum up it would appear that the situation ofthe Jewish community in the area ofreligious freedom is very satisfactory and receives thefirm support ofthe authorities.

(b) Muslim minority

38. The representatives ofthe Muslims stated that they patently enjoyed freedom in religious matters. Generally speaking, religious activities are not impeded by the authorities, despite the incidents which occur from time to time in certain places relating to the building ofmosques, the management ofKoranic schools and the arrival ofimams or teachers from abroad. Despite the difficulties, inter-religious dialogue is encouraged and manifests itselfnotably through the establishment ofIslamic-Christian associations.

However, a number ofspecific problems were brought to the attention ofthe Special Rapporteur. All the Muslim representatives considered the granting ofthe status oflegal person in public law to be a priority issue, so that community could enjoy the benefits and rights granted to the dominant religions, the Jewish community and other groups such as the Mormons. The authorities replied that it had not yet been possible to grant this status because ofthe divisions within the Muslim community and hence the non-existence ofa single spokesman for the whole community. They pointed out that the non-granting ofthat status in no way meant that Muslims could not enjoy the constitutional guarantees in the area ofreligious freedom. The State Minister for Foreign Affairs said that he favoured the extension ofthe advantages conferred by legal person in public law status to the Muslim communities and considered that that process was under way.

40. According to the Muslim representatives, legal person in public law status would resolve the current problems relating to the fact that Islam is not taught in State schools. In this connection, attention was drawn to the need for inter-religious education facilitating the integration ofMuslims and the dissemination ofthe values oftolerance within society. In the absence ofsuch education,the Muslim community currently has private Koranic schools and, in particular, Turkish teaching institutions. However, one ofthe serious problems relating to the Koranic schools was said to be that they had to confine themselves to religious education, sheltered from intolerance and the repercussions ofpartisan policies. The authorities, including the Federal Minister ofLabour, the Minister ofJustice and the State Minister for Foreign Affairs, said that the teaching ofIslam in State schools represented the best solution. They added that the prevailing view in Germany was that the practice ofIslam should be encouraged through German Muslim institutions not accountable to http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsflTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 foreign entities.

41. The granting oflegal person in public law status would also enable Muslims to benefit from public financing, notably for the purposes ofreligious instruction and places ofworship, would limit any dependence on foreign financing, which, according to certain spokesmen, was currently provided by Saudi Arabia and Libya in particular.

42. Lastly, such legal status would permit the more effective integration ofMuslimswithin German society.

43. The Muslim representatives mentioned other recurrentproblems, which, according to the Lander, occurred sporadically and took the form ofgeneralpublic opposition to plans for the building of mosques, calls to prayer, the slaughter ofanimals, the wearing ofhead scarves and the non participation ofgirls in mixed sporting activities, notably swimming. It was nevertheless stressed that, in the face ofthese situations, the authorities often demonstrated genuine pragmatism and acted on a case-by-case basis. In order to prevent these problems, greater acceptance ofIslam within " German society was needed. The authorities and the Muslim representatives themselves said it was also the responsibility ofthe Muslim community to make Islam better known, despite the inherent difficulties ofMuslims in Germany, at the outset had been mainly migrant workers and not highly educated. Initiatives aimed at the better understanding and recognition ofIslam are to welcomed, in particular the establishment, by the Office ofthe Commissioner for Foreigners' Affairs in Berlin, ofan Islamic study centre and the publication ofa brochure on Islam and an inter-cultural calendar including Muslim holidays.

44. It is also essential that the media, and the popular press in particular, should cease portraying a negative image ofIslam and Muslims, who are too often associated with religious extremists.

45. Religious extremism, although existing only in small minority groups in Germany, must be treated with appropriate vigilance by the authorities. The latter, like Muslim leaders, emphasized the existence ofa minority extremist trend opposed to any integration within society, often using religion as a political tool, and sometimes.expressing.itselfin a violent form within the Muslim community, such as the recent murder ofan imam in Berlin because ofinternal conflicts. Muslim representatives stated that it was necessary to ensure proper religious leadership and that they were trying to'preventthe arrival from abroad ofimams who wereuneducated, not tosay intolerant, for example through 'an agreement with Turkey authorizing the sending ofimams only after scrutiny of applications by Muslim leaders in Germany.

46. According to non-governmental spokesmen, Islam should be given a wider public forum and should not be confined strictly to the private domain; that could in certain circumstances promote clandestinity, whichwas in no one's interest.

47. Lastly, the Muslim leaders interviewed by the Special Rapporteur emphasizedthat they desired the integration ofMuslims, but certainly not their assimilation. [back to the contents]

C. Other groups and communities in the field ofreligion and belief

48. During his visit, the Special Rapporteur had interviews with representatives ofthe Baha'is, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses and ofthe Bhagwans, Hare Krislma and Unification Church. He also collected information on the Charismatic Christians, the Community ofUniversal Life, Transcendental Meditation, Fiat Lux, etc. Finally, he had consultations with associations ofvictims ofsects, Bundestag Study Commission on sects and psycho-groups, and the authorities.

49. In these talks, one and the same group or community might be described, depending on whom he was talking to, as a new religious movement, a religion, a sect, or alternatively a psycho-group. The Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that international law has no legal definition ofthe concept of

http://www.unhchr.ch/HuridocdaIHuridoca.nsflTestFrame/ObIfeb5e404a3 974c125660... 14/08/2003 -J ._-- - religion or, consequently, ofnew religious movements. Similarly, the international human rights instruments do not cover the concepts ofsect or psycho-group.

50. Internationally, particularly in Europe and above all in Germany, the debate focuses onsects, mainly because ofa number offactors:

(i) Competition in the area ofreligion and beliefbetween traditional religions on the decline and a multitude ofnew groups and communities claiming the status ofreligions, but often described as sects, or psycho-groups or commercial enterprises;

(ii) Changes in society, which mean that established values are yielding other values, a money-centred materialism which sometimes tends to treat religion rather like a product;

(iii) Public opinion alarmed by sometimes crude popular reporting ofabusive exploitation oftheir followers by these sects or psycho-groups and by extraordinary events, such as collective suicides;

(iv) State intervention, particularly through the establishment ofparliamentary commissions of inquiry (cf. Germany, Belgium, France, etc.) in response to public opinion.

51. The question is often raised ofhow to deal with the sect problem at a time when beliefs seem to be more and more exposed to 'deregulation and when the certainties ofyesteryear seem to be giving way to a multiplicity ofcreeds with a shifting ofmembership, in whichrelativism is often held up as an absolute value. The problem is made still more complex by the fact that their capacity for action and reaction seems to be inexhaustible, whether in terms oftheir faith, the law or their finances.

52. In general however, we find that there is confusion about the groups and communities mentioned above, which are often labelled as dangerous sects or commercial enterprises. Furthermore, although originally, from the standpoint ofthe history ofreligion and the social sciences, the concept ofa sect was a neutral one and referred to a community ofpersons forming a minority within a religion who broke away from it, today it has pejorative connotations and the term "sect" is often associated with danger. The confusion is even greater in the case ofthe Church ofScientology, often described as a sect and a commercial enterprise, although those two ideas are contradictory, inasmuch as the term "sect" initially has a religious dimension, unlike "commercial enterprise", and that whatever happens a religion is not a business. c

53. In order to clarify the situation and avoid any confusion, the Special Rapporteur wishes to stress that a distinction should be made between a "sect", on the one hand, and a "psycho-group", on the other, and to point out that among the groups described as sects, some are the propagators ofa religion while others are less so, or not at all, so that one has to be very cautious and attentive in this field in order to avoid both intolerance based on religion or beliefand the exploitation offreedom of religion and belieffor purposes alien to it. The Special Rapporteur would therefore like to on the information and explanations he obtained from the Bundestag Study Commission and the government authorities, from victims' associations and from the groups and communities concerned, both those long established in Germany (Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.) and those that are of more recent origin (Unification Church, etc.).

54. The representatives ofthe Study explained that it had been set up on the basis of article 4 ofthe Constitution, following complaints by victims and parents ofvictims ofsects and psycho-groups, and by religious organizations not wishing to be equated with the groups and communities complained of.

55. It was stated that the Commission's work gave rise to misunderstandings in these groups and communities, which felt themselves to be under pressure because ofthe Commission's very existence and the lack ofunderstanding ofits mandate. It was pointed out that the Commission's task http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsfTfestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 -- - -r -- --·- --'

was not to limit religious freedom, to pass value judgements or to define religions, but, on the contrary, whatever the religion or belief, to protect human rightsby collecting and analysing information on possible dangers from sects and psycho-groups. It also had to take the heat out ofthe debate on sects and psycho-groups by ensuring more open information on the subject and to make recommendations to Parliament.

56. The federal and Land authorities explained that they had been confronted since the mid-I970s " with the phenomenon ofwhat are known as sects ofyoung people and sectarian groups. The State's intervention is due, onthe one hand, a revival in these groups' activities and, on the other, to complaints by the public about negative experiences in this area. The focus ofconcern is the potential danger that these groups could represent for adolescents' personal development and social relations, leading to their dropping out ofschool and vocational training, radical changes in personality, individual forms ofdependence, lack ofinitiative and difficulties ofcommunication, often aggravated by the group structure characteristic ofcertain communities, but also to material losses (ofa financial nature) and psychosocial harm.

57. To draw attention to the potential dangers, both for the individual and for society, the Federal Government has launched a large-scale information and education campaign designed increase public awareness and stimulate a critical discussion on what the and sectarian groups have to offer.

58. It was added that the obligation to be neutral did not mean that the State was obliged to accept, without reacting, everything done in the name ofan alleged religious or philosophical belief, particularly as far as criminal proceedings were concerned. Reference is made here to intervention by the State outside the freedom ofreligion and beliefor within the limits ofmanifestations ofthese freedoms (as described in part I. A and B). The State's obligation to be neutral applies to information produced by the authorities on the groups and communities in question, that is, objectivity of information (see The authorities explained that information collected by the State issued, for example, in the form ofpamphlets for the public - combined information from sects and sectarian . groups and information on the groups. Ifthere is any question about this information, any interested party take the matter to court. For example, the Community ofUniversalLife lodged a complaint in 1993 against the information given about it in a pamphlet entitled "Sects and psycho-groups in Germany". The Administrative Tribunal dismissed the case on the grounds that the information given did not violate the law. In a similar case, complaints by Transcendental Meditation were rejected in various proceedings which went as far as the Constitutional Court. c 59. According to the authorities, in order to enable the State to discharge its obligations in the matter ofprotecting citizens, the lawgives it the right, whichderives directly from the Constitution, to take a position in relation to the public and to issue recommendations warnings, for religious and philosophical communities among others, The Federal Government must, however, respect the following restrictions: the principles ofnecessity and due proportion; the principle ofequity (appropriate, necessary and reasonable means), not acting on the basis ofinadequate grounds; value judgements to be based on a body offacts which essentially have to be assessed correctly and at their true value.

60. The seriousness ofthe threat to the public interest and to the rights protected by the Constitution, and the content and function ofthe warning, determine the extent and the limits ofthe specific information provided by the State. "

61. As a whole, the problems ofsects and sectarian groups involve the competence ofthe Federal Government, the Lander and the communes, which cooperate closely. An interministerial working group and a round table attended by representatives ofthe Federal Government and the Lander provide an opportunity for regular exchanges ofexperience coordination ofactivities. Apart from these official arrangements, there are contributions from church representatives responsible for questions relating sects and religion, parents' action groups institutionalized"at the federal. regional

http://www.unhchr.chIHuridocdalHuridoca.nsfrrestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 J ---- - r - and local levels, consultative bodies in the sector ofprivate and public social work, and other social groups and bodies. The authorities have, however, stated that the State is not out to become involved in any kind ofcompetition in the area ofreligion and belief. According to officials and members of the Bundestag Study Commission, similar regulatory provisions ought to be adopted with regard to psychotherapists and psycho-groups as part ofconsumer protection. In other words, products offered to the public in return for payment should comply with the appropriate regulations, including those on consumer protection.

62.,The associations for victims of and psycho-groups described their activities relating to mutual aid, counselling and information, and social rehabilitation with victims and those close to them and with anyone wanting to get away from the groups and faced with problems financial exploitation, psychical and psychological dependence, etc. It was explained that there was no question ofchallenging the freedom ofreligion and belief, but merely abuses in the manifestations of that freedom. Mention was also made ofthe need to regulate the psychotherapy market, where financial motives were often concealed under a religious label.

63. As regards the groups and communities dealt with in this part ofthe report, the Mormons have the statusofa legal person in public law with the rights and advantages that that implies, including tax exemptions. As far as the levying ofa church tax concerned, the Mormons have decided not to seek to join the system. They do not encounter any difficulties in the field ofreligious education, since their children have freedom ofchoice, any more than with the construction ofplaces of worship and circulation oftheir publications. They are also quite free to engage in door-to-door proselytizing activities. The Mormon representatives said they did not suffer any persecution. However, as a consequence ofthe present debate on sects and psycho-groups, they say there is a climate ofmistrust towards all religious minorities. This situation is said to be the result, in particular, ofthe intervention ofthe major Churches and oftheir staffresponsible for sects, who are regarded as specialists and act as an interest group in dealings with the State in order to counter competition from other groups and communities by labelling them all, without distinction, as sects or psycho-groups. This climate is also, according to the Mormons, kept up by the media. In their view, the most disturbing aspect is State intervention in the form ofpamphlets on the sects, also covering the Mormon community. They explained that the information on them contained in the pamphlets was accurate, but that their inclusion under the heading of"sect" constituted defamation. The Mormons consider this to be an abuse ofthe State's neutrality. Concerning the Bundestag Study .Commission, they said that they had no problem with its members, but felt the effects ofthe existence ofsuch a commission because it led to confusion about minorities, sects and psycho groups.

64. The Jehovah's Witnesses, as stated in part I. C, are regarded as a religious community, but have been denied the status ofa legal person in public law by the German courts. Admittedly, this refusal does not mean, according to the authorities, that they are not recognized as a religious community. However, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, in the lower echelons ofthe administration and in the media, this court decision is used in order to portray them as a sect. The Jehovah's Witnesses also state that they are victims ofa climate ofintolerance created by the discussions on sects going on in the Bundestag Study Commission and by the activities ofthe major Churches' advisory bureaux on sects. Official information pamphlets on sects refer the reader to these advisory bureaux. According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the State is thereby in a sense abandoning its neutrality, insofar as it is favouring the dominant Churches in the competition between religions. Furthermore, according to the Amtsblatt des Hessischen Kulturministeriums No. 8/97 of 15 August "documentation, information and other publicity material from presumed sects and psycho-groups, generally sent free to schools and other educational institutions, must not be passed on by the school ... to teachers or to schoolchildren or their parents, nor must it be placed in school libraries or teachers' libraries". However, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, video recordings oftendentious television broadcasts are shown in schools and the "dangerous aspect" oftheir community is emphasized in discussions with pupils.

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/TestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c 125660... 14/08/2003 65.This atmosphere ofdistrust, and even latent intolerance, because ofthe factors mentioned above, is also said to affect the Baha'i community.

66. The Unification Church says that it suffers from discrimination. The Gentian Government refused the founder ofthe Unification Church, the Reverend Sun M. Moon, and his wife HaleJ. H. Moon entry into its territory in November 1995 on the grounds that they constituted, according to representatives ofthe community, "a threat to public order" as such were said to fall into the category ofpersons who should be refused entry by the countries that have signed the Schengen Treaty. The Special Rapporteur was jnformed by the German authorities that the ban was based on the provisions ofthe legislation on aliens and that the courts would have to decide whether it should be upheld. The Unification Church has also been denied tax exemption.because, according to its representatives, a "lower court" would not agree to hear testimony from experts on the Unification Church, but based its decision on the evidence ofa financial official, who had decided that the community was political in nature. publications giving information on the so-called sects and psycho-groups were said to be defamatory and wrong about the Unification Church and based solely on the opinions ofopponents ofthe community; the representatives ofthe Unification Church regarded this as a departure from State neutrality. The pamphlets in question, moreover, were circulated in State schools in order to denigrate the Unification Church. The representatives ofthe Unification Church expressed their concern about the Bundestag Study Commission, which they said was composed ofpeople who were anti-sectand belonged to traditional religions and which was aiming atthe adoption ofnew legislation by which their community, among others, would be regulated and placed under surveillance. Finally, according to its representatives, the Unification Church encounteredanatmosphere ofintolerance as a result ofthe behaviour ofthe major Churches and the State, an atmosphere which was fed by the media.

67. The representatives ofHare Krishna and the Bhagwans also said that they encountered a climate ofintolerance because ofthe factors discussed above and expressed fears about the possibility of limitations on their activities.

far as the Community ofUniversal Life, Transcendental Meditation and Fiat Lux are concerned, the Special Rapporteur did not have an opportunity to meet their representatives, but obtained information from non-governmental sources, which describe them as psycho-groups. [back to the contents]

D. Church ofScientology

69. The Special Rapporteur had interviews with representatives and follower.s ofthe Church of Scientology and with the German.authorities, representatives ofreligious minorities and other groups and communities in the field ofbeliefand religion and non-governmental organizations, including those for victims ofsects and psycho-groups.

70. The representatives ofthe ChurchofScientology stressed that it was a religion and fell within the internationaldefinition ofa religion formulated in the two studies on religious.freedom prepared by the first two Special Rapporteurs ofthe Sub-Commission on Prevention ofDiscrimination and Protection ofMinorities (United Nations publications, sales Nos. 60JQV.2 and 89JCN.3 respectively), by the third Special Rapporteur in his working paper (ElCNA/Sub.2/1989/32), and by the Human Rights Committee in its general comment 22 of20 July 1993 on article 18 ofthe International Covenanton Civil and Political Rights. .

71. They said that the Church ofScientology and its members were the victims ofdiscriminatory measures by the Government and that the German authorities tried to justify such discrimination by arguing that Scientology was neither a religion nor a philosophical community and that, as a consequence, Scientologists could not avail themselves ofthe rights set forth in the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination ofAll Forms ofIntolerance and ofDiscrimination based on Religion or Belief in article 18 ofthe International Coven on Civil and Political http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsfrrestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974cI25660... 14/08/2003 ---r -- - ._ .

72. The representatives ofScientology provided very detailed documentation, a ofwhich follows, in which the terms and expressions used are those employed by the Scientology representatives:

(a) Decision dated 6 June 1997 by the ministers ofthe interior ofthe 16 Lander to place Scientologists under national surveillance by the Office for the Protection ofthe Constitution for a period ofone year, despite the lack, according to the Scientology representatives, ofevidence linking the Church ofScientology to any criminal activity.

Blacklisting and boycotting ofScientologists at all levels ofsociety, according to the Scientology . representatives, under an insidious policy ofexclusion launched, encouraged and approved by the German Government in order to stigmatize Scientologists and outlaw them from society, which, in their view, amounts to religious apartheid (cf. use ofdeclaration forms described as "sect filters", called for and recommended by the administration, requiring individuals and firms to declare that they are not Scientologists, do not sympathize with Scientology and reject its teachings, in particular in order to be recruited or keep a post in a firm, or even, in Bavaria, in order to enter the civil service, to join a political party, trade union, social or professional group or sports club or to be able to enter it, to signa commercial or service contract, or to open a bank account or obtain a bank loan; publication ofa decree by the Federal Minister ofLabour depriving Scientologists ofthe right to run employment agencies; adoption decrees prohibiting the circulation ofChurch ofScientology publications, adoption ofmeasures to prevent the sale ofreal estate to the Church ofScientology in Hamburg; discrimination against Scientology activities, particularly through the non-availability of public subsidies, contracts and public halls).

(c) Information programmes for teachers, parents, students, police officers, judges, procurators, prison staff, health workers, and chambers ofcommerce and industry and for the publicin general, providing, according to the representatives ofthe Church ofScientology, incorrect and unscientific information, all ofit unfavourable to the Church ofScientology and its members, and creating a climate ofintolerance reflected in particular in physical and verbal harassment ofScientologists' children in schools, and indeed their expulsion, even from kindergartens.

(d) Incidents involving violence, harassment, intimidation and threats to Scientologists. [End summary ofthe Scientologyrepresentatives' written submissions presented and commented on orally the Special Rapporteur.]

73. To the Special Rapporteur's questions on the explanations for the situation as described bythe Church ofScientology, the Scientology representatives said that since reunification Germany had been undergoing an identity crisis, that in an increasingly secular world the major Churches were losing members and encountering financial difficulties, whereas the minorities, including Scientology, had an increasing following and, as new religions, were running into opposition.

74. On the question ofthe situation ofmembers ofthe Church ofScientology, its representatives explained that any member was free to leave the Church, that he was not obliged to abandon his family and society, and that his financial contributions were voluntary. The existence ofpunishment camps in the United States was denied, and it was explained that they were in fact rehabilitation centres for Scientology members. The representatives added that, despite 10 years ofinquiries into Scientology in Germany, it had not been possible to establish any proofof criminal activity.

75. Concerning the Bundestag Study Commission, the Scientology representatives stated that they had been invited to appear before it, but they had laid down certain conditions, namely, that the Commission's files on them should be made available so that they could answer any allegations. Since that condition had not been met, they had decided not to appear before the Commission, but to apply to the courts in order to obtain the files in question. According to the Scientology representatives, it was essential that their Church's case should be given due consideration in a fair

http://www.unhchr.ch/HuridocdaJHuridoca.nsfrrestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 trial based on the facts, SQthat an objective decision could be reached. They further stated that the members ofthe Commission had already decided that Scientology was not a religion.

76. In his interviews with the authorities, the Special Rapporteur collected a great deal of' documentation and very detailed explanations on the subject ofScientology. As far as the Federal Government's position is concerned, it considers that the Scientology organization only calls itselfa church as a front behind which it pursues its economic interests. From what has been said by the founder ofScientology, Ron Hubbard, and by Scientology itself, not to mention the accounts of former members, it chose to call a religion, according the German authorities, first, in order to itselfofthe legal and tax enjoyed by religious communities, and secondly, in order to sell its products better (e.g. management training, business management know-how, etc.) and to be able to smear any critics by talking about persecution ofa church (for example, in connection with a Scientology campaign, the measures taken against it by Germany were compared to the Nazis' attitude to the Jews). The FederalLabour Court, for its part, decided that the Scientology organization was a commercial enterprise (see LC).

77. However, according to the German authorities, the question whether Scientology can be classified as a religion or not can be left aside; the important thing is respect for the existing legal order. According to the German representatives, the measures taken with respect to Scientology are simply designed to protect citizens and the liberal democratic order. On 6 June 1997, the Conference ofMinisters and Senators ofthe Interior ofthe Lander concluded that the legal conditions were met for Scientology to be kept under observation by the services responsible for the protection ofthe Constitution. Under article3 (1) ofthe Federal Law on the Protection ofthe Constitution, the Federal Office for the Protection ofthe Constitution is required to keep under observation tendencies directed against the fundamental democratic and liberal or the existence or the security ofthe Federal Republic or a Land, aimed at illegally attacking the constitutional organs ofthe Federal Republic or a Land or their members. According to the German authorities, what has to be done first ofall is to observe whatever tendencies may be evident in Scientology that are contrary to or incompatible with the basicdemocratic and liberal order. Under article 4 (1) ofthe Federal Law, such tendencies are specific forms ofpolitical behaviour within or on behalfofan association of persons - designed to nullify one ofthe constitutional principles. The collection ofinformation depends on the existence ofreal evidence, under artic1e4 (1) ofthe Federal Law. According to established precedent, real evidence within the meaning ofthe Federal Law is present when there are circumstances making it reasonable to suppose that such tendencies exist and hence requiring further research. It suffices for the body ofavailable evidence taken together to imply the existence ofthe tendencies in question, even ifno individual piece ofevidence is enough in itself. Furthermore, mere presumptions or suppositions that there could be tendencies going against the basic democratic and liberal order are not enough. The term "real evidence" allows some room for the -exercise of judgement in its interpretation, but as an undefined legal concept it is entirely subject to the judge's discretion. The Conference ofMinisters and Senators ofthe Interior ofthe Lander considered that there was real evidence about Scientology implying tendencies directed against the basic democratic and liberal order. According to the authorities, this evidence is to be found in the use made of Scientology publications, in statements by ex-Scientologists and in information obtained in judicial proceedings at the national and international levels, from which the following objectives may be inferred: according to the authorities, Scientology gets a hold not just over its members, through immoral and illegal techniques ofpsychological manipulation and repression, but also over the State and society. There is real evidence to show its intention ofestablishing a Scientological society (in particular, a Scientologicallegal system) and dominating the existing order by tyranny and despotism.

78. The measures for keeping scientology under observation are designed to check whether the evidence found can be confirmed or invalidated. The Conference ofMinisters and Senators ofthe Interior ofthe Lander will therefore review, in a year's time, the question whether or not Scientology continue to be kept under observation. The authorities have pointed out that being under

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsfffestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974cI25660... 14/08/2003 .....-- - c observation was not preventing Scientology from pursuing its activities and that the services responsible for the protection ofthe Constitution did not have police powers in performing their duties and could not carry out enforcement measures such as searches, hearings and seizures. According to the German representatives, the charge made by Scientology that the purpose of keeping it under observation is merely to prepare for banning it is pure speculation.

79. With regard to the measures taken in Bavaria, the authorities explained that they were directed against the system ofScientology and not against individuals in need ofcounselling and assistance. They added that an individual's beliefs were not the business ofthe State, which had to react when the freedom ofthe individual or democratic principles were threatened. Since I November 1996, candidates for jobs in the Bavarian civil service have to state in a questionnaire have relations with scientology. The purpose ofthis questionnaire is to check or see whether the candidate displays the necessary loyalty towards the State and ifhe conforms with the democratic order. According to the authorities, any candidate who has relations with Scientology is entitled to an interview at which he has a chance to demonstrate that he is fit to work in the civil service. There is thus no question ofall Scientologists being automatically excluded from the civil service. The point is not to establish that the candidate has a "faith" or an ideological commitment to the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard, but to see how far the candidate may let the organization control his thinking and behaviour and how far it actually does so. The claim that Scientologists are persecuted because of their "religion" is also refuted the fact that there are Scientologistsemployed in Bavaria as civil servants. The use ofprotective declarations in the award ofpublic contracts in certain specific fields (business advisory services, stafftraining and management, in-service training and seminars, consultancy, software development and maintenance, project development and supervision, research and development) serves to protect public services against any infiltration by Scientology. It is thus incorrect to assert that firms managed by Scientology are without exception excluded from the award ofpublic contracts. The Bavarian Cabinet agreed on 8 August 1996 to refuse to give any State support or assistance to events having a relationship with Scientology, or to withdraw all support if the fact ofScientology participation was only discovered later. In point offact, the denial ofgrants to Scientologist artists does not mean that they are treated differently and unconstitutionally because of their faith or their ideas. The decision to withhold support from an event is based not on the ideas protected by article 3, paragraph ofthe Constitution, but on the behaviour and methods of Scientology, which are against the law. In addition, these artists have, without any restriction, the chance to organize events in Germany themselves, without public subsidy, or to collaborate with .agencies working inthe sector in question which are not eligible for subsidies. Finally, according to the German authorities, the violations ofhuman rights alleged by Scientology to have occurred in the private sector are not verifiable.

80. According to the authorities, Scientology and its members are not subjectedto any discrimination or intolerance, and still less to persecution, and all measures taken with respect to them are in accordance with the law. Furthermore, in Germany, as a State governed by the rule oflaw, Scientology is entirely free to challenge these measures in the courts. Toa comment on the intemperate and passionate nature ofthe debate on Scientology, they replied that Scientology was conducting an aggressive campaign nationally and internationally with many differentaims, includingpublicity. The German authorities also support the view that the problems should be dealt with case by case and not lumped together on a general basis. Several government representatives said that they not in favour ofbanning Scientology, but rather ofinforming the public about it and about the judicial proceedings against it. Other representatives, particularly in Bavaria, said that they were in favour ofbanning Scientology, but only after establishing proof.

81. Many representatives ofgroups and communities in the field ofbeliefand religion stated that they are present suffering from the consequences ofthe conflict between the German authorities and Scientology, consequences which are reflected at the social level in suspicion or indeed rejection ofany group which, because it is a minority group, is suspected ofabusing religion for financial gain. Representatives ofreligious minorities unanimously expressed their indignation at the statements and publicity put out by Scientology comparing Germany's attitude towards it to that of http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsf/TestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 the Nazis towards the Jews or to religious apartheid.

82. Associations for victims ofsects and psycho-groups stressed that Scientology was not a religion but a psycho-group, Le. an agency for managing people's lives, whose abuses (financial exploitation ofmembers through methods ofpsychical and psychological dependence) should be combated. They explained that they did not want Scientology to be banned, but that they did want full light to be thrown on its activities and its abuses to be limited. [back to the contents]

Ill. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 83. The Special Rapporteur devoted his attention to, first, legislation relating to tolerance and non discrimination in the field ofreligion and belief(part I), and secondly, the implementation ofthat legislation and the policy in force (part II).

84. As regards legislation, the provisions ofthe Constitution fully guarantee freedom ofreligion and belief, and the provisions incorporated from the Weimar Constitution governing relations between the State, the churches and the religious communities are very comprehensive. They strike the right dynamic balance between religion and politics, avoiding the extremes of"anti-religious clericalism" and "religious clericalism" and allowing a symbiotic relationship, governed by principles of neutrality, tolerance and equity, between the State and religions. In this respect, itis noteworthy that the status oflegal person in public law that may be accorded to cults and entails certain rights and advantages is related not to the religious nature ofthe cult but to whether it is in the public interest. This status ensures a form ofcooperation with the State, but unlike other legal persons in public law, cults are not incorporated into the State structure. Where the principle ofneutrality is concerned, and as the question ofreligion in State schools demonstrates, whether in the case ofthe crucifix or religious instruction, interpretation ofthe principle is not rigid and has to take balanced account, within the framework ofthe provisions ofthe Constitution, ofthe minorities and the majority, while respecting the freedom ofbeliefofall.

85. On the question ofthe implementation oflegislation and the policy in force, the Special Rapporteur focused his attention and analysis successively on religious minorities and other groups and communities in the field ofreligion and beliefand on the Church ofScientology, in the context oftheir relations with society and the State.

86. In order to conduct a comprehensive and at the same time detailed analysis ofsituations, the Special Rapporteur considers it necessary to recall the characteristics ofthe overall framework within which German legislation and policy on religion and beliefare implemented. Undeniably, Germany is today a democratic liberal State based on sound democratic institutions, legislation that conforms to international law and a vigorous international human rights policy. German democracy is also based on atradition oftolerance which, notwithstanding certain vicissitudes, is no less real. It is within, and thanks to, this overall framework that freedom ofreligion and freedom ofbeliefcan and do express themselves.

87. Where religious minorities are concerned, the Jewish community is generally satisfied with its situation and sometimes goes so far as to describe it as privileged in comparison with that in other democratic countries.

88. The Jewish community is able to flourish as a religious minority and enjoys active political, institutional and financial support from State. Not only have" the German authorities adopted and implemented an immigration policy that is favourable to the arrival ofJews from the former USSR, to ensure the continued existence ofthe Jewish communities in Germany, but they also keep a very close watch on any manifestations ofhostility towards the Jewish community.

89. The situation ofthe Muslim minority is markedly less favourable, although on the whole it is not unsatisfactory, Many Muslims in Germany are concerned about a number ofissues and problems.

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsffTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974cI25660... 14/08/2003 -J ..-

90. The first issue is granting the status oflegal person in public law which Muslims have applied for but not yet obtained. Admittedly, the fact that they do not enjoy this status in no way means that Muslims are denied the constitutional guarantees applicable to religion. However, this status makes it possible to institutionalize a form ofcooperation with the State with the common aim ofdealing with the same group ofpeople. In conformity with article 140 ofthe Constitution and with German case law, the Muslim community satisfies the criteria regarding its statute, the size ofits membership, the guarantee ofpermanence and respect for the legal order ofthe State. In view ofthe pragmatic approach to this issue shown by German officials during the Special Rapporteur's visit, as it is not possible to treat Islam the same way as a Christian Church or for it to be represented by an authority, the Special Rapporteur believes that it would be useful to broad consultations with Muslim organizations with a view to granting the status oflegal person in public law to those that agree to cooperate withthe State. This would create a momentum vis-a-vis the other organizations and it would be spelled out that a distinction between a legal person in public law and community with the status and advantages ofa legal person public law mightusefully be, envisaged. Practical, pragmatic, and hence operational solutions cannot be excluded unless they have been actively sought, tried out or desired.

91. In view ofthe wish to introduce the teaching ofIslam into State schools in order to provide genuine religious instruction free from indoctrination and regimentation, granting public status, or at least its equivalent, would be extremely useful. This legal status, together with the rights and advantages associated with it (which include public funding), would enable the Muslim minority to enjoy greater independence from foreign influence. It would offer a better guarantee that the teaching ofIslam would convey values oftolerance and openness towards religious diversity and would ultimately ensure better integration ofMuslims within German society, thereby halting any drifttowards exclusion or isolation. This necessary integration ofMuslims, as distinct from assimilation, would essential tool in resolving difficulties, such as the occasional opposition between part ofthe populationand Muslims over plans to build mosques and other Muslim religious activities. Nevertheless, the image ofMuslims among broad fringes ofGeiman public opinion is . often negative. This is often attributable toa certain sector ofthe popular press which seeks sensationalism atany price and often, and almost implicitly, assimilates Muslims with extremists or even terrorists. This injustice towards Muslims tends to make problems more complex. The authorities are responsible for protecting the Muslim minority, for helping to combat this iniquitous .portrayal ofMuslims and for tackling the manifestations ofhatred intolerance towards them that occasionally marked the early years ofthis decade. Efforts to combat the ignorance propagated by a sector ofthe popular and to strengthen education in tolerance could constitute priorities in this sphere.

92. Astoother groups and communities in the field ofreligion and beliefand the Church of Scientology, the Special Rapporteur wishes first ofall to recall the relevant international law and jurisprudence.

93. In its general comment 22 of20 July 1993 concerning article 18 ofthe International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Human Rights Committee stated that the right to freedom ofthought, conscience and religion is far-reaching and profound. It observed that freedom ofthought and freedom ofconscience were protected equally with the freedom ofreligion and belief. The fundamental character ofthose freedoms was also reflected in the fact that the provision could not be derogated from, even in time ofpublic emergency, as stated in article 4, paragraph 2, ofthe Covenant. The Committee emphasized that restrictions on the freedom to manifest religion or beliefwere permitted only iflimitations were prescribed by law and necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms ofothers, and that they must not be applied in a manner that would vitiate freedom ofthought, conscience and religion. The Committee also considered that the "limitations be applied only for those purposes for which they were prescribed and must be directly related and proportionate tothe specific need on which they are predicated. Restrictions may not be imposed for discriminatory purposes or applied in a

http://www.unhchr.ch/HuridocdaJHuridoca.nsfffestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 J discriminatory manner". The Special Rapporteur also wishes to point out that international law provides no legal definition ofthe concept ofreligion and that the international human rights instruments make no reference to the concepts ofsects or psycho-groups.

94. Against the background ofa highly emotional international debate on sects or new religious movements, a debate which is not without interest for all the parties concerned, there is, as the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons have observed, total confusion in which all groups and communities in the field ofreligion and beliefare generally considered to be dangerous and using religion for other ends, whether financial or criminal. This confusion generates a climate ofsuspicion or or latent intolerance society. In this regard, numerous representatives of groups and communities emphasized that the use ofthe terms "persecution", "official State policy of discrimination", "religious apartheid" and any comparison orparallel with Nazism to describe the situation in Germany in the field ofreligion and beliefwas "shocking", "inappropriate", "false", "unworthy" and "highly reprehensible". In this connection there is no need to emphasize that any comparison between modem Germany and Nazi Germany is so shocking as to be meaningless and puerile.

95. According to the representatives ofthe groups and communities, with the exception ofthose of the Church ofScientology, there is, strictly speaking, no obstacle to the exercise oftheir activities. What they face can be described ratheras a climate ofsuspicion, or latent intolerance, responsibility for which, in their view, lies with the major Churches, which are anxious to preserve their dominant religious status and stem the loss ofmembers to other groups and communities in the field of religion and belief. The major Churches allegedly use their influence with the State for this purpose through its political and administrative institutions, and in particular through public information campaigns on sects, assistance for victims ofsects andthe Bundestag's Study Commission. This climate is.allegedly maintained by the popular press and sometimes reflected among low-ranking civil servants. However, according to these same representatives, by satisfying the demands ofthe major Churches in the areas referred to above, the State is violating the principle ofneutrality. In the view ofthe Church ofScientology, in addition to the measures described the German State practises a policy ofdiscrimination against it, notably by denying its religious nature and thus refusing to grant it the rights and advantages linked to that status, such as tax exemption, and by applying discriminatory measures such as placing it under surveillance, public information campaigns on Scientology and measures to exclude it from society.

96. On the question ofcompetition between the major Churches and other groups and communities in the sphere ofreligion or belief, the Special Rapporteur believes there is a need for an ongoing dialogue to avoid maintaining a climate ofmistrust or even intolerance within society.

97. In this respect, it is worth mentioning that information should be expanded and diversified. It is only normal for the State to make available to the public information which is objective and as comprehensive as possible, so as to guard it against anything that might undermine its freedom of choice or expose it to unnecessary risks, on the understanding that the right to employ legal means must be preserved and guaranteed to all, particularly those who believe that their interests have been harmed by unsubstantiated or incorrect information.

98. Conducting public information and education campaigns untouched by any form ofideological or partisan indoctrination is one ofthe proper functions ofany contemporary State. The State's obligation to remain neutral applies to the content ofthe information, which should not be discriminatory, defamatory or slanderous. As has been pointed out in Part n. C, the State's legitimate role in informing and educating citizens has to be perfomied within precise limits (principles of necessity, fair balance, equity, and value judgements based on facts that have been properly and fairly assessed) and in conformity with the law. In any event, remedies must remain available to individuals and groups wishing to dispute the content ofofficial information and, where necessary, oppose its dissemination.

http://v.'WW.unhchr.chlHuridocdalHuridoca.nsflTestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 99. On the question ofthe granting ofthe status oflegal person in public law, the Special Rapporteur found that many representatives ofnon-governmental organizations with whom he spoke were confused and associate such status with of religious status. However, in conformity with German legislation and legal precedent, granting ofthe status of person in public law does not depend on the religious nature ofthe organization concerned but on whether it is in the public interest. For this reason, the Jehovah's Witnesses are as a religious community by the authorities, who have not in fact granted them the status oflegal person in public law. Similarly, although the Mormons have been granted this legal status, they are nonetheless listed in a brochure on sects published by the State. What is indisputable is that freedom ofreligion and beliefmay not as such be challenged.

100. tax exemptions granted by the State to legal persons in public law are concerned, the Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that these privileges do not extend to their industrial or commercial activities. For this reason, a religious community recognized as being in the public interesthas to keep its commercial activities separate from its non-commercial activities. In other words, the fact that an organization is religious in character and has been as being in the public interest does not automatically mean that all its activities are exempt from taxation.

101. Generally speaking, and in conformity with intemationallaw, State intervention in the field of religion and beliefcannot involve taking responsibility for people's conscience and promoting, imposing or censuring a particular faith or belief. And no group or community may arrogate to itself responsibility for the conscience ofindividuals. The State is, however, responsible for ensuring observance ofthe law, and in particular ofcriminal legislation relating to the preservation ofpublic order, embezzlement, breach oftrust, assault and battery, failure to assist a person in danger, indecent behaviour, procuring, unlawfully practising medicine, kidnapping and abduction ofminors, etc. In other words, the State possesses a sufficiently broad range oflegal instruments to combat the various guises adopted by groups and communities cloaking themselves under religion, and to deal with any misunderstandings that arise in respect ofgroups and communities involved in matters of religion and belief. The various legal instruments must be rigorously enforced, particularly in the social and tax spheres, in a substantiated and non-discriminatory manner. Likewise, any community or group that considers that its rights and freedoms have been undermined by the State must avail itselfoflegal procedures, i.e, the courts. In both situations, it is ofvital importance, when conflicts .arise, for the State and communities and groups in the field ofreligion and beliefto put themselves in the hands ofthejudicial system, which decides on the facts, rather than to court the passions ofthe masses or to act on the spur ofthe moment. These principles ofbehaviour must be unequivocally observed and applied, so that persons are properly informed and shielded from confusion, suspicion and intolerance. It is equally necessary for everyone to be aware and duly informed ofthe nature of any measures taken by the Government in the field ofreligion and belief, oftheir mandate and their objectives. The purpose, ultimate goal and function ofthe Bundestag Study Commission should be further clarified. It should also be emphasized that the Commission is not a court of responsible for conducting trials. Similarly, where surveillance ofthe Church Scientology is concerned, it must be clearly and precisely recalled that the measures involved are for the purpose ofobservation and inno way prejudge the organization's nature and activities, in respect ofwhich the evidence gathered by the authorities will be confirmed or invalidated or still under examination at the end of the observation period. The measures will in no way prejudge or replace the decisions taken by the courts. In any event, the law must be enforced and enable conflicts to be resolved.

102. The Special Rapporteur also believes that the State, beyond day-to-day management, must implement a strategy to prevent intolerance in the field ofreligion and belief. He believes that sustained efforts are required to promote and develop a culture oftolerance and human rights. The State must play an active role in developing awareness ofthe values oftolerance and non discrimination in the field ofreligion and belief. Lasting progress may be achieved, mainly through education and above all the school, by ensuring that a human rights culture isimparted by school curricula and textbooks and by properly trained teachers. This educational strategy must not only http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocda/Huridoca.nsflTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974cI25660... 14/08/2003 propagate a culture oftolerance among the population, by inculcating values underpinned by human rights, but also develop awareness and reasoned and reasonable vigilance towards any form ofabuse or threat in the field ofreligion and belief. There is a fundamental and immediate need for analysis and education to prepare young people to deal with questions ofidentity, religion and and to provide them with pointsofreference, models and reasons for living, so as to prevent them from falling victim to manipulation, extremism and fanaticism and to enable them freely to assume'full responsibility for their lives. In this context, the Special Rapporteur also calls for an examination and analysis ofthe human condition today, which is frequently characterized by standardization, anonymity, depersonalization or evena vacuum, which religions, whose very nature makes them vehicles for human rights, have not always managed to filL This phenomenon needs to be studied in order to identify its origins and possible remedies; this requires the involvement ofall protagonists in the social, political and religious fields.

103. The Special Rapporteur also recommends a campaign to develop awareness among the media, and in particular the popular press, which all too often portrays matters relating to religion and belief in a grotesque, not to say totally distorted and harmful light. The recommendations made bythe Special Rapporteur under the programme ofadvisory services (E/CNA/1995/91, p. 147) should therefore be implemented, in particular training workshops for media representatives to develop their awareness ofthe need to publish information that respects the principles oftolerance and non discrimination. These measures would also make it possible to educate and shape public opinion in accordance with these principles.

104. The views ofMr. Habib Hussain, Special Rapporteur on the promotion andprotection ofthe right to freedom ofopinion and expression, regarding the advisability ofintroducing legislation which makes punishable any writingsor statements fomenting hatred, particularly in the would also be extremely valuable.

105. The SpecialRapporteurreiterates his recommendation (E/CNA/1997/91, para. 103) regarding the organization ofa high-level intergovernmental meeting to consider and arrive at a collective approach to sects and religions that respects human rights.

106. Finally,the Special Rapporteur again draws attention to the need to shield questions ofreligion and belieffrom the tension and clashes ofinterests, in particular political and economic interests, that exist in the internationalsphere so that the freedoms ofreligion and beliefmay be exercised with the serenity proper to them and not diverted from their purpose, for the benefit ofevery faith, of citizens and ofsociety as a whole, and also ofhuman rights. [back to the contents]

1. [back to the text]

Article 136

(I) Civil and civic rights and duties shall be neither dependent on, nor restricted by, the exercise of freedom ofreligion.

(Il) The enjoyment ofcivil and rights and eligibility for public office shall be independent of religious faith.

(Ill) No one shall be required to disclose his religious belief. The authorities shall not have the right to inquire into a person's membership ofa Church or cult except to the extent that a statistical survey ordered by law makes it necessary.

(IV) No one may be compelled to perform any religious act or ceremony or to participate in religious or to religious ofoath . http://\\'\vw.unhchr.chfHuridocdaIHuridoca.nsflTestFrame/Oblfeb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 -- --

Article 137

(I) There shall be no State Church.

(ll) Freedom ofassociation to form Churches or cults shall be guaranteed. The union ofChurches or cults within the territory ofthe Reich shall not be subject to any restriction.

(Ill) Every Church or cult shall regulate and administer its affairs independently, within the limits of the law applicable to alL It shall confer its offices without the participation ofthe State or the communes.

(Iv) Churches or cults shall acquire legal capacity according to the general provisions ofcivil law.

(V) Churches or cults shall remain corporate bodies in public law ifthey have been previously. The other Churches or cults shall be granted the same rights upon application iftheir statute and the number oftheir members offer an assurance oftheir permanence. Ifseveral such Churches or cults in public law unite in one organization, that organization shall also be a corporate body in public law.

(VI) Churches or cults that are corporate bodies in public law shall be entitled to levy taxes in accordance with Land law, on the basis ofthe civil taxation lists.

(VII) Associations whose purpose is the joint cultivation ofa philosophical ideology shall have the same status as Churches or cults.

(VIII) Such further regulations as may be required for the implementation ofthese provisions shall be the responsibility ofLand legislation.

Article 138

(I) State contributions to Churches or cults, based on law, contract or special legal title, shall be redeemed by means ofa Land regulation. The principles for such redemption shall be established by the Reich.

(ll) The right to own property and other rights ofChurches and cults, and also religious associations, in respect oftheir institutions: foundations and other assets destined for purposes ofworship, education or charity are guaranteed.

Article 139

Sundays and legal holidays continue to be guaranteed by the law as days ofrest and spiritual contemplation.

Article 141

To the extent that there is a need for religious services and spiritual care in the army, hospitals, prisons and other public institutions, the Churches and cults shall be permitted to perform religious acts, which shall be free from all constraint.

I SITE MAP I SEARCH I INDEX I DOCUMENTS I TREATIES I MEETINGS I PRESS I STATEMENTS

http://www.unhchr.chlHuridocdaIHuridoca.nsfiTestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 - -

http://www.unhchr.chIHuridocdaIHuridoca.nsfffestFrame/Ob1feb5e404a3974c125660... 14/08/2003 UNITED NATIONS

Distr. ontern Civilational and Covenant , Political Rights GENERAL

CCPR/C/SR.l553 23 January 1997

ENGLISH Original: FRENCH

Summary record of first part (public) ofthe 1553rd meeting: Germany. 23/01/97. CCPR/C/SR.1553. (Summary Record)

Convention Abbreviation: CCPR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

Fifty-eighth session

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE FIRST PART (PUBLIC)'" OF THE 1553rd MEETING

Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Tuesday, 5 November 1996, at 10 a.m.

Chairman: Mr.

CONTENTS

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTEHBY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT (continued)

Fourth periodic report ofGermany (continued)

The summary record ofthe second part (closed) ofthe meeting appears as document CCPR/C/SR.1553/Add.l.

The meeting was called to order at 10 a.m.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT (agenda item 4) (continued)

Fourth periodic report ofGermany (continued) (HRI/CORE/l/Add.75, English only;

, http:/h,V\vw.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsfl385c2add1632f4a8c 12565a9004dc311l389a698ddOL. 13/0812003 CCPR/C/84/Add.5, English only; CCPR/C/58/A/GER; CCPR/C/58/L/GER/3)

1. The Gennan delegation resumed its place at the Committee table.

2. The CHAIRMAN invited the members ofthe Committee who had not yet done so to ask further questions about the topics referred to in part II ofthe list ofissues (CCPR/C/58/L/GER/3).

3. Lord COLVILLE, referring to freedom ofexpression, said that he had to revert forcefully to the question ofthe measures being taken against sects. He requested the German delegation to refer to paragraph 3 ofthe Committee's General Comment on article 18 ofthe Covenant (General Comment No. 22 [45]). In reply to the concerns expressed by some members ofthe Committee about the activities against sects being carried out in Germany, the delegation had said that Parliament was worried because sects were a danger for constitutional rights and the authorities had simply issued discrete warnings. He did not think that those were simply warnings. He had a list ofpublications by six Lander relating to six sects. He did not agree with the theories or the philosophy ofany ofthose sects, but he did not think that they should be discriminated against and their followers should not be discriminated against either simply because they belonged to such sects. He questioned whether the Covenant was compatible with that type ofofficial publication by Lander Governments. He also questioned the legitimacy ofthe measures which had been taken by the Bavarian Minister of Education, Culture, Science and the Arts and involved sending all schools a circular describing a particular anti-sect policy and requesting all school headmasters to report on any measures they had taken. In his view, it was unacceptable that, as of1 November 1996, every applicant for a civil service position in Bavaria had to state whether or not he belonged to the Church ofScientology. He saw no objection ifthe Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church had sect specialists and tried to warn their own congreations about other beliefs, but the same was not true ofgovernment authorities and, according to the information available to him, there were "sect commissioners" in four Lander and at the federal level. It was dangerous to use government machinery to issue warnings against such groups - and, to his knowledge, there was no legislative authority for doing so. Who knew which group might be targeted later?

4. Mr. ANDO said that he would like some explanations about the implementation ofthe Federal Data Protection Act and the Stasi Files Act, as referred to in paragraphs and 98 ofthe periodic report (CCPR/C/84/Add.5, English only). He wished to know how a private individual could apply to have data contained in the files disclosed, which authority decided on disclosure and whether such a decision could be appealed,The same questions arose with regard to the Stasi files.

5. Mr. BHAGWATI asked whether it was true that the Federal Government and the Lander Governments had worked out a plan to give courses, through the

German Academy ofJudges, to sensitize judges against sects. He had learned that seminars had been organized to sensitize family law judges about the problem ofsect-dependent parents in child custody proceedings.

6. He also wished to know whether it was true that seats on the Federal Constitutional Court were allocated for apportionment among representativesofmajor political parties.

7. Mrs. EVATT, referring to freedom ofassociation (para. (h) ofpart IT ofthe list ofissues and to the extent ofsurveillance and banning ofextreme right organizations, as indicated in paragraphs 148 and 216 ofthe report(CCPRlC/84/Add.5, English only), said that, according to the information available to her, raids were often carried out on offices and the homes ofthe members ofthose organizations and material described as propaganda was confiscated. She asked whether there were special laws which restricted the right to privacy in that case and how it was established that the circumstances referred to in article 9, paragraph ofthe Basic Law were met.

http://www.unh chr.ch/tbs/doc.ns£!385c2add1632f4a8c12565a9004dc311/389a698ddOl... 13/08/2003 8. MAVROMMATIS said that, in asking the question contained in paragraph (a), namely, "What are the procedures for the implementation ofany views adopted by the Committee under the Optional Protocol?", the Committee had expected the delegation to explain how decisions the Committee might take under the Optional Protocol were implemented. For example, ifthe Committee had determined that the claim ofthe author ofa communication who said that he had been wrongly convicted was true and had requested the German State to release that person or grant himcompensation, what procedure was followed? Were there specific criteria or would ex gratia compensation be paid? He also wished to know whether there were any differences in respect of implementation between decisions bya European body and decisions by the Committee under the Optional Protocol. .

With regard to freedom ofassociation, the Committee considered that the right to strike be restricted in the case ofessential services. A provision prohibiting the right to strike ofmembers of the civil service would be too general because the work done by persons having that status certainly was not all in that category.

10. Mr. WECKERLING (Germany), referring to the question ofsects, said that the State had a general duty to protect citizens and warn them ofany dangers. That duty derived from article 4 ofthe Basic Law. In fulfilling that obligation, the State had opted for the method ofdisseminating information brochures on sects, for example; as Lord Colville had mentioned. The Federal Constitutional Court had confirmed that such brochures were lawful in all cases. Ofcourse, sects objected to being singled out in that way, but they had access to ordinary remedies and their representatives could apply to administrative courts and even to highest court. His delegation could not give any information on what had happened in the Land ofBavaria, which exercised its sovereignty in that regard. It could, however, state that there were no sect commissioners the federal level. The Lander had centres which collected information on sects and there was also a special commission ofthe Federal Parliament which dealt with sects. In general, freedom ofreligion was broadly protected in law and practice. The seminars organized by the German Academy of Judges for family law judges were notindoctrination courses, as had been claimed in Germany, but, rather, information seminars designed to give those judges the necessary training to deal with the cases that might come before them. The seminars all dealt with social topics and did not focus exclusively on the activities ofsects. Moreover, judges in Germany were independent enough to resist any kind ofindoctrination ifthe State tried to convince them ofsomething.

11. Referring to the members ofthe Federal Constitutional Court, he said that halfwere elected by a Bundestag committee and the other halfby the Federal Council (Bundesrat). Possible candidacies were discussed in public and all political parties represented in Parliament could put forward candidates. The aim was to establish a balance and ensure that the judges ofthe Federal Constitutional Court, who often had to deal with highly political issues, enjoyed substantial democratic support.

12. With regard to the power ofthe Ministry ofthe Interior to ban an association, such a measure could be taken only ifit had been proven that the association had committed an offence covered by the Penal Code. That criterion was obviously applied in the case ofextreme right groups, which had committed criminal acts in recent years. The ban could come only from the Federal Constitutional Court, on the initiative ofthe Federal Government. The last organization which had been banned had been called the Extreme Right Party, but it had not been a political party at all. The last ban against a real political party dated back to 1956, when the German Communist Party had been banned. The possibility ofbanning associations which had harmful activities was entirely in keeping with article 5, paragraph I, ofthe Covenant, which prohibited groups or persons from engaging in any activity or performing any act aimed at the destruction ofany ofthe rights recognized in the Covenant.

13. As to the implementation ofthe decisions ofthe European Court ofHuman Rights and the Human Rights Committee, the obligation to give effect to them derived not from intemallaw, but

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.ns£.385c2add 1632f4a8c12565a9004dc311/389a698ddOL. 13/08/2003 from the instruments establishing those bodies. In case ofthe European Court ofHuman Rights, the obligation was contained in the decision itself, but that was not the case ofthe Committee, since the Covenant did not provide for any particular implementation machinery. In that sense, the Covenant had a weaker effect for States parties than the European Convention on Human Rights. Whenever a ruling was adopted under the European Convention, the German State did everything in its power to comply with it.

14. Mrs. VOELSKOW-THIES (Germany) said that the Stasi files could be consulted on application to the authorities. Ifthe application was denied, administrative proceedings could be instituted. . .

15. At the preceding meeting, a member ofthe Committee had asked whether the report under consideration (CCPR/C/84/Add.5, English only) had been brought to the attention ofnon governmental organizations. The report was described in a brochure published in several thousand copies and addressed in particular to non-governmental organizations, which had also been informed ofthe dates for the Committee's consideration ofthe report, but they had declined the invitation that had been sent to them, claiming that it would be too expensive for them to be represented.

16. Mr. HABERLAND (Germany), replying to a question on the civil service, said that civil servants were a special kind ofpublic sector employees. For historical reasons, there was what might be called a professional civil service, which enjoyed guarantees provided for in the Constitution, such as independence, job security and career opportunities. Employees in that category did not, however, enjoy the right to strike. That category included teachers and proposals designed to deprive them of that status and make them ordinary public sector employees had not been approved by Parliament, which continued to be committed to keeping the current system. The prohibition ofthe right to strike ofteachers was justified by the beliefthat an industrial dispute must not be settled at the expense of children.

17. The CHAIRMAN thanked the German delegation for the additional information it had provided and invited the members ofthe Committee to make their closing statements.

18. Mr. ANDO paid tribute to the German delegation, which had answered nearly aUthe questions the Committee had asked. He understood the problems that had arisen as a result ofthe reunification oftwo countries governed by very different regimes for nearly halfa century. That process necessarily involved a number ofconflicts ofinterests and ideologies. It was, however, essential to avoid any violation ofthe rights ofpart ofthe population in order to defend the dominant interests. He therefore trusted that everything would be done to ensure that the very useful elements ofthe society ofthe former German Democratic Republic were integrated into German society, in its interest.

19. Like other members ofthe Committee, he continued to be concerned about police abuse, which was usually directed at foreigners, He had taken note ofthe efforts being made by the Government to combat xenophobia and ofthe results already achieved. In that area as well, however, he hoped that the idea ofsecurity and public order would not lead to any violation ofcertain fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy.

20. Mrs. CHANET thanked the German delegation for the very detailed replies which it had given to the Committee's questions and which had shed light on a great many points. She would nevertheless have liked to know more about the nature ofthe disciplinary measures for members ofthe police forces who were responsible for ill-treatment and the number ofcases in which such measures had been applied. With regard to pre-trial detention, she wished to know what measures the Government had taken or intended to take as a result ofthe report by the European Committee for the Prevention ofTorture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The problem offonner GDR officials was obviously a sensitive one and she hoped that the Gennandelegation would send the Committee information on how the authorities decided whether or not such officials should be

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf7385c2add1632f4a8c12565a9004dc311/389a698ddOL. 13/08/2003 integrated. She also hoped that the Government would guarantee respect for the fundamental rights ofall persons concerned in conditions ofequality.

21. Referring to Germany's reservation to the Optional Protocol, she said that she would like the Government to reconsider its decision. In that connection, she recalled that, in its General Comment No. 24 [52], the Committee had stated that a reservation to the Covenant through the Optional Protocol was not in keeping with the rules ofinternational law. In general, she recommended that the German authorities should review their interpretation article 26 ofthe Covenant as they had formulated it, following the adoption by the Committee ofthe General Comment on non discrimination (No. 18 [37]). She wasconvinced, that when the Committee came to consider Germany's fifth periodic report, the process ofreunification would have been completed the report would thus give a clear idea ofthe human rights situation in all parts ofthe territory.

22. Mr. EL SHAPEI thanked the German delegation for its replies. He hoped that the German authorities would carefully reconsider their interpretation ofarticle 26 ofthe Covenant in view ofthe difference between the way they read it and the way the Committee did. He drew attention to the fact that that difference ofviews might give rise to problems in future, when the Committee had to consider communications involving Germany.

23. He was also concerned about the excessive use offorce by police officers and by the ill-treatment ofpersons in custody or in detention. Most ofthe complaints in that regard had been formulated by foreigners, asylum-seekers and refugees. In some cases, the acts in question seem to have been racially motivated. The German delegation had nevertheless stated that remedies for obtaining compensation were available to the victims. There was no doubt that the mechanisms available to the administrative and judicial authorities for the monitoring ofthe custody and treatment ofdetainees also had to be strengthened.

24. Mrs. EVATT thanked the German delegation for its replies. She welcomed Germany's reunification and was aware that that process had led to a number ofproblems with regard to the protection ofhuman rights, some ofwhich had not yet been solved. However, the German authorities' commitment to human rights was based on a very strong legal tradition, which offered the guarantee ofa rigorous and consistent approach to matters involving such basic rights. It was nevertheless not enough to adopt satisfactory legislation in order to create a tolerant andjust society. The task was a long and arduous one and she hoped that the next periodic report would reflect the progress made.

25. Mrs. VOELSKOW-THIES (Germany) thanked the members ofthe Committee for their very useful questions and comments, which would be taken duly into account by her country's authorities.

26. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had completed its consideration ofthe fourth periodic report ofGermany. He thanked the delegation for its cooperation in a very fruitful dialogue and announced that the fifth periodic report ofGermany was due on 1 August 1998.

27. The German delegation withdrew.

The public part ofthe meeting rose at 10.50 a.m.

TOP I HOME I INSTRUMENTS I DOCUMENTS I INDEX I SEARCH

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/385c2add1632f4a8c12565a9004dc31l/389a698ddOL. 13/08/2003 AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 34614/97 by KIRCHE DEUTSCHLAND e.V. aqai.nst Germany

The European -Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 7 April 1997, the following members being present:

Mr. S. TRECHSEL, President Mrs G.H. THUNE Mrs. J. LIDDY MM. A. S. A. WEITZEL J.-C. SOYER H. DANELIUS F. MARTINEZ C.L. ROZAKIS L. LOUCAIDES J. -C. GEUS M.P. B. MARXER M.A. NOWICKI I. CABRAL BARRETO B. CONFORTI - I. J. MUCHA D. G. RESS A. PERENIC C. P. LORENZEN K. HERNDL E. BIELIUNAS E.A. ALKEMA VILA AMIGO Mrs. M. HION MM. R. NICOLINI A. ARABADJIEV

Mr. H.C. KRUGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protectic of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the introduced on 20 January 1997 by SCIENTOLOGY KIRCHE DEUTSCHLAND e.V. against Ger.many and registere on 28 January 1997 under file No. 34614/97 ; http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtrnl.asp?Item=O&Action=Htrnl&X=813131802.,.. 13/08/2003 Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the RulE of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE . FACTS

The applicant is a registered association (eingetragener Vereir German law which has its seat in Munich (Munchen) . It is represented by its President, Mr. Helmuth Blobaum, who retained Mr. Douwe Korff, a and lecturer of Cambridge (United Kingdom), tc act as counsel.

The facts of the case as submitted by the applicant associatior may be summarised as follows.

The applicant association is part of Scientology, a organisation with its international headquarters in Los Angeles (Uni States of America). It has Sciento1ogy organisations in several citi in Germany.

The applicant association submits that for many years itself ar its approximately 30;000 members, including children, parents, businessmen and members of political parties, have been subjected German government bodies and officials to a campaign of religious intolerance and human rights violations. In this context the applicc association refers in particular to the following events which took place during the period from April 1991 to May 1996:

. Members of the Federal Parliament (Bundestag) in Bonn and of Parliaments of the Lander discussed repeatedly the question of Scientology. They warned that Sciento1ogy was particularly dangerouE and considered that it did not constitute a church but instead was n more like a commercial enterprise with political claims for the· absolute truth without regard for the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the individual. The Federal Government and the GovernmentE of the Lander were requested to take action to counteract Scientolc expansion, namely to withdraw the legal capacity from Scientology organisations, to initiate criminal investigations against Scientolc to determine if adherence to Scientology can be classified as drugli addiction, to increase the information about Sciento1ogy in schools, governmental offices and in public, to prevent the economic influenc of Scientology in coordination with the Employers Association and Chambers for Industry, Commerce and Trade and to work out a list of other measures designed for the reduction of Scientology activities.

The leading German political parties declared that membership j the applicant association was incompatible with the tenets of their parties. Members of the political were requested either to leave the parties or Scientology. All levels of'society were called

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=HtmI&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 upon to dismiss Scient610gists from their social positions and fron jobs, including in schools, and to boycott companies owned by Scientologists as well as Scientology artists.

The Federal Government and Governments of the Lander adoptE joint strategies with a view to reducing the influence of organisations. A national documentation and information centre and permanent interministerial working group were established to ensure that coordinated actions against Scientology were discussed. Scientology was considered to be the biggest and most dangerous sect in Germany engaged in infiltrating the economy by its members joinir unions and becoming employees of companies. It was proposed to investigate whether Scientology was a criminal organisation and how counteract Scientology under health, healing practitioner and drug laws. The Permanent Conference of Ministers of the Interior of the Lander recommended a ·series of measures to oppose Scientology, including a recommendation that Government offices in the area of fiscal affairs place a declaratory clause in contracts with companiE doing business with the Government to ensure that no business is dor with Scientologists. The Prime Ministers of the Lander meeting in Berlin endorsed this recommendation and felt it necessary that the Federal Government, Governments of the Lander and local would warn of the practices of Scientology and use all legally possj ways to counter this worldwide operating organisation1s objective of domination.

In a foreword of an information leaflet published in January 1996, the Federal Minister for Families, Pensioners, Women and (Bundesministerin Familie, Senioren, Frauenund Jugend) stated t many persons being affected by the dubious practices and activities the Scientology organisation had asked for her help and advice. According to her, this organisation was not a religious or philosophical community, but a commercial organisation.

In various measures were taken to reduce the influence c Scientology and to warn of its dangers.

The Government of the Land of Bavaria ordered schools to inforn pupils of all ages and their parents about the goals, strategies operating procedures of Scientology. Headmasters were required to report by September 1996 on the measures they have taken to implemer this information programme.

In Hamburg the authorities decided inter alia not to let any public halls and not to sell any real estate property to and to examine to what extent it was legally admissible not to construction orders to Scientology and firms connected with it. also refused to put a music hall at the disposal of a music firm owr by Scientologists.

In Stuttgart a decree was issued prohibiting the public distribution of printed matters published by Scientology organisatic

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 Government officials and executives of well-known companies informed German business leaders on such topics as the use of IIsect filters", ways of identifying and dismissing Scientologists and tact to repair the economic damage when a company was blacklisted becausE it was suspected of employing members of such an association. A decl was issued by the Federal Minister of Labour preventing from obtaining licences necessary to operate employment agencies.

Non-governmental organisations, such as the Circle of German Brokers (Ring DeutscherMakler), an association composed of.over 4,000 real estate brokers, announced that it would require all membe of the Circle to sign a declaration attesting that they did not fol] the teachings of the founder of Scientology in order to be sure not have any Scientologists among its members. Real estate brokers and tenants associations, supported by the working group IIS cientologyll c the Hamburg Ministry of the Interior, published a list of suspected Scientologists and their real estate concerns, exhorted the public t boycott all Scientology businesses, and urged banks to refuse to do business with Scientologists. Banks refused to grant loans to Scientologists and informed press that they would not do with members of Scientology organisations. As a result of the negat publicity, a bank cancelled its bank card agreement with the Church Scientology of Frankfurt.

Other commercial associations urged businessmen to include clauses in contracts requiring business partners to declare that the were Scientologists.

Furthermore, as part of the Government's information programme, established Churches called upon to act in cooperation when dealing with new religious movements.

In a civil action brought against the association IIScientology Kirche Hamburg e. V.II by one of its members, the Federal Labour Cc (Bundesarbeitsgericht), in a decision of 22 March 1995, considered t the case concerned a dispute between employee and and was within the competence of the labour courts. Having examined in detai the structure, aims and practices of Scientology, the Federal Laboul Court concluded that the association was not a religious or philosophical community within the meaning of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), but a commercial organisation.

More recently, in August 1996, the Bavarian Government announce that Scientologists would be banned from civil service. The Christic Democratic Union (Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands - CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands - SPD) in Lower-Saxony declared that they had agreed Scientologists were not welcome in public service and that prospecti Government employees and companies doing business with the State declare that they were not associated with Scientology. The CDU Yout Organisation (Junge Union Deutschlands), CDU and SPD officials calle for a boycott of two films in which Scientologists performed roles. In the Lander of Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Htm1&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 demanded that Government funding for cultural and artistic events bE prohibited if Scientologists would perform there.

As from 1 November 1996 the Government of Bavaria requires all persons seeking employment in the public sector to fill out a questionnaire regarding their association with Scientology and affil that they disassociate themselves from Scientology. In other Lander similar measures were adopted. The Land of Berlin sent a form to alJ contractual partners authorities requiring each that does business with the Land of Berlin to declare in writing they were not associated with Scientology. The Land of Hamburg requj teachers to sign such forms.

The applicant association further refers to numerous incidents of boycotting Scientologists and dismissing members of Scientology f their functions, such as sportsmen, managers and businessmen. Childl of Scientologists were expelled from nursery and private schools from sports clubs.

The applicant association submits finally that in 1995 and 199E the Scientology organisations in Hamburg and Munich received over te bomb threats. Further anonymous threats of violence from Neo-Nazi groups were received by Scientology organisations in other German cities.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant association complains, both in its own capacitye a religious organisation and on behalf of its members, of being the victim of an unparalleled campaign of discrimination, vilification, exclusion and intimidation, carried out, condoned and encouraged by German authorities. The campaign .as such, it is said, discloses serious and continuing violations of the Convention.

Referring to case of Donnelly and six others v. the United Kingdom (Nos. 5577-5583/72, Dec. 15.12.75, D.R. 4 p. 4), the applicant association submits that it its the victin of an administrative practice against which there is no effective remedy. The administrative practice on the part of the respondent Government renders the remedies which are available in individual cases, but which are not susceptible of stopping the policy or 'practice, inadequate in the present case. The applicant association alleges that the administrative practice continues to this day and t it and its members are therefore the victims of an ongoing violatior of the Convention. On both of these grounds the application cannot rejected on the basis of Article 26 of the Convention.

The applicant association maintains that Scientology is not an unlawful organisation, is not operating against the law and is also contrary to the constitutional of the Federal Republic of Ger.many. Nevertheless Scientology is regarded as an enemy of the The applicant association further submits that the Church of Scientology is a bona fide religion, that it is' not a commercial

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 organisation and that its ethical standards fully uphold human digni and respect for the law. The campaign of which it is a victim is in submissions alarmingly similar to actions taken by the Nazis .against Jewish people and minority religions in the 1930s, preceding the Holocaust, and to attacks made by German authorities in the 1950s ar 1960s against communists or anyone deemed sYmpathetic to left-wing terrorists in the 1970s.

The applicant association alleges that the campaign in general as well as the information campaigns, the use of "Anti-Scientology Forms", the improper determination of the legitimacy of its beliefs, violate the non-derogatory, untouchable core of Article 9 para. 1 of the Convention. It refers in this context to the Otto-Preminger Institut v. Austria judgment given by the European Court of Human Rights on 20 September 1994 (Series A no. 295-A) and stresses that States have a positive obligation under Article 9 para. 1 of the Convention to secure the peaceful enjoYment of religious freedom fre attacks by others. In the present case, however, the German State, rather than protecting the applicant association from attacks, endo! such attacks and joins them. Furthermore, the measures taken as part of the campaign are not "prescribed by law" and are, in any case, grossly disproportionate and unnecessary in a democratic.society, ir violation of para. 2 of this provision.

The applicant association further complains that the campaign predictable and serious effects on the private life of .Scientology members. These effects are grossly disproportionate and destructive the private and family lives of the persons affected and violate Article 8 of the Convention.

Furthermore the measures taken against members ofScientology e the mere basis of their membership of that organisation, without consideration of their individual actions and in spite of the fact t Scientology is lawful, violate Article 10 of the Convention general] The actions taken against artists; musicians and actors, on the sole basis of their affiliation with Scientology infringe the rights of t affected individuals to freedom of artistic expression; in violatior of Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention.

The applicant association further alleges that the general measures taken against Scientology as well as specific measures aime at preventing Scientology members from meeting freely violate Article 11 of the Convention.

The information campaigns in schools directly infringe the of Scientology parents to have their children educated in accordance with their beliefs, in violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1.

The systematic attempts to exclude Scientologists from. all maje political parties, which, according to the applicant association, quasi-public status under German law, on the sole basis of their religious beliefs, is an attempt to exclude members of Scientology f the political life of the nation in violation of Article 3 of Protoe

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=HtmI&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 No. 1, as well as of Article 11 of the These attempts amount to an abuse by the political parties in question of the right to freedom of association, in violation of Article 17 of the Convention.

The applicant association also submits that there is no effecti remedy against either the administrative policy of the respondent Government or the fundamental political assessment which lies at The applicant assoeiation alleges a violation of Article 13 c the Convention.

The applicant association finally submits that the above meaSUl and violations affecting its enjoYment of all the above-mentioned rights and freedoms, amount to discrimination in the enjoYment of rights and freedoms in violation of Article 14 of the Convention.

THE LAW

1. The applicant association alleges that itself and its members a group are the victims of an administrative practice of violations Articles 8, 9, 10, 11 and 17 (Art. 8, 9, 10, 11, 17) of the and of Articles 3 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2, Pl-3), in conjunction Articles 13 and 14 (Pl-2+Pl-3+13+14) of the Convention.

The Commission has first examined to what 'ext ent the conddt.Lons laid down in Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention have l: met in thepreserit case.

Article 25 para. 1 (Art . 25-1) of 't he Convention provides:

"The Commission may receive petitions addressed to the SecretaI General of the Council of Europe from any person, non governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Partie of the rights set forth in this Convention, that the High Contracting Party against which the complaint has been lodged has declared that it recognises the competence of the Commission to receive such petitions. ( ... )"

The Commission recalls that, in order for applicants to be able to avail themselves of this provision, they must fulfil two conditic they must fall into one the categories of applicants referred to Article 25 (Art. 25) and they must have a claim to be a.victim of a violation of the Convention.

As regards the first condition, the Commission notes that the applicant association is an association of individuals as defined German domestic law. As such it clearly falls into one of the categories of applicants mentioned in Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention, namely that of a non-governmental organisation.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtrnLasp?Itern=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 As for the second condition, the Commission recalls that the concept of "victim" as used ih Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Conventic must be interpreted autonomously and independently of concepts of domestic law such as capacity to bring or to take part in legal proceedings.

An applicant cannot claim to be the victim 'of a breach of the rights or freedoms protected by the Convention unless there .i s sufficiently direct between the applicant as such and the injury he maintains he suffered as a result of the alleged breach. J particular, according to the established case-law of the Commission, a corporate applicant cannot claim to be itself a victim of alleged to have interfered with the Convention rights of its indivic members (cL No. 9939/82, Dec. 4.7.83, D.R. 34 p. 213; No. 10733/84, Dec. 11.3.85, D.R. 41 p. 211; No. 18598/91, Dec. 18.5.94, D.R. 78 71, 72; No. 24581/94,' Dec. 6.4.95, D.R. 81 pp. 123, 126).

In the present case it is clearly not the applicant associatior as such which is the victim of the alleged violations of the guaranteed by Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention (respect for life) and of Articles 2 and 3 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2, Pl-3) (parent right to educate their children in conformity with their religious philosophical convictions and right to free e Leot.Lona) . Solely the members of the applicant association, as individuals, could claim te be victims of a violation of these rights, which by their nature are not susceptible of being exercised by an association.

The Commission notes that the applicant association claims alse to represent its members as alleged victims of a violation of these a number of other rights enshrined in the Convention. However, the applicant association has not identified these individuals and in ar event has not shown that it has received specific instructions from each of them (cf No. 10983/84, Dec. 12.5.86, D.R.47 p. 225).

It follows thatCinsofar as the application alleges violations c the rights of the applicant association's individual members, it is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Conventi

2. Insofar as the applicant association alleges to be itself the victim of a violation of Articles 9, 10, 11, 14 and 17 (Art. 9, 10, 11, 14, 17) of the Convention, the Commission notes to a large extent it complains of the conduct of members of parliament, political parties, commercial companies and other non governmental organisations or private persons. However, 'according ·te Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention, the Commission can only dea] with applications alleging a violation of Convention rights by a Contracting Party to the Convention, i.e. a violation claimed to been committed by State bodies. By contrast, it may not receive applications directed against private individuals or private enterprises or private law corporations. In this respect the refers to its established case-law (No. 11002/84, Dec. 8.3.85, D.R. p. 264; No. 11590/85, Dec. 18.7.86, D.R. 48 p. No. 12327/86, De

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 11.10.88, D.R. 58 p. 85).

The applicant association's complaints of violations of its Convention rights by the above non-governmental bodies or persons al therefore incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected under Article 27 para. (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

3. ,' The Convention may nev.ertheless be invoked before the Commissic where it is claimed that the State has failed in its duty to protect the Convention rights of an applicant against interferences by or institutions, provided that a positive obligation of the State in this repect can be derived from the particular provision of the Convention at issue (cf. e.g. No. 8282/78, Dec. 14.7.80, D.R. 2J p. 109; No. 12242/86, Dec. 6.9.1989, D.R. 62 p. 151; Eur. Court HR, Kokkinakis v. Greece judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A, p. 21, para. 48; Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria judgment of 20 1994, Series A no. 295-A, p. 18, para. 47). The Commissic notes that in the present case the applicant association indeed a claim of the State having failed in accomplishing its positive obligations under the Convention, and in particular under Article 9 (Art. 9) thereof. Apart from that, it is not clear from the general submissions of the applicant association what specific acts might constituted a direct interference by the German State authorities wj the applicant association's rights.

However, in any event, the Commission is not required 't o decide whether or not the facts alleged by the applicant association any appearance of a violation of the Convention as, under Article 2E (Art. 26) of the Convention,it may only deal with the matter after domestic remedies have been exhausted, according to the generally recognised rules of international law, and within a period of six months from the date on which the final decision was taken.

Commission observes that domestic remedies have been exhausted if, before the highest authority, the applicant has raisec at least in, substance, the complaint he before Commission (cf. No. 17128/90, Dec. 10.7.91, D.R. 71 p. 275). The Commission recalls in this respect that Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention intended to provide national authorities with the opportunity of remedying violations alleged by an applicant (Bur. Court HR, L6pez Ostra v. Spain judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 303-C, p. para. 38).

The Commission notes that in the present case the rights invoke by the applicant association are also guaranteed by the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz). Insofar as the applicant association has or might have seized the competent courts, for instance by lodging an interin injunction (einstweilige Anordnung) and introducing main before the administrative courts view to prohibiting certain statements or publications concerning its activities, it could subsequently also have lodged a constitutional appeal with the Fedel Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) 'in accordance with t

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Htm1&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 relevant provisions of the Basic Law and the Act on the Federal Constitutional Court (Gesetz das Bundesverfassungsgericht). Thi remedy would have been available, for instance, in respect of the decision of the Federal Labour Court of 22 March 1995. However, the applicant association has not shown that it has ever resorted to sue a remedy.

The Commission finds therefore that in the present case the domestic authorities afforded the opportunity to rectify violations of the Convention alleged by the applicant association.

The applicant association submits that it was under no obligati to exhaust domestic remedies since any remedy would in the circumstances of the case be inadequate and ineffective, having to the alleged existence of an administrative practice of the Germar authorities.

It is true Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention only requires the exhaustion of such remedies as relate to the alleged breaches of the Convention and at the same time can provide effecti\ and sufficient redress. An applicant does not need to exercise which, although theoretically of a nature to constitute a remedy, de not in reality offer any chance of redressing the alleged breach (ct No. 9248/81, Dec. 10.10.83, D.R. 34 p. 78; Eur. Court HR, Akdivar ar others v. Turkey judgment of 16 September 1996, to be published in Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996, para. 66).

However, there is no indication in the present case that the domestic remedies, which were at the disposal of the applicant association under German law, are not effective remedies in practice to remedy the situation complained of. In particular, the Commissior finds nothing to support the applicant association's allegation there exists an administrative practice in Gerinany which would make judicial remedies ineffective. Moreover, the existence of doubt as the chances of success of a domestic remedy does not exempt an applicant from the obligation to exhaust it (cf., e.g., No. 13669/8E Dec. 7.3.90, D.R. 65 p. 245).

Therefore, an examination of the application by the Commission does not disclose the existence of any special circumstances which might have absolved the applicant association, according to the generally recognised rules of international law, from exhausting the domestic remedies at its disposal.

It follows that the applicant association has not complied the condition as to the exhaustion of domestic remedies, and this the 'application must therefore be rejected under Article 27 para. (Art. 27-3) of the Convention.

4. applicant association finally complains under Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention that no effective remedy was at its disposal to assert its before the national authorities of

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802«... 13/08/2003 Article 13 (Art. 13) reads as follows:

"Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity."

Commission recalls that Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention guarantees availability of a remedy at national leve] to enforce the substance of the Convention rights and freedoms in whatever form they may happen to be secured in the domestic legal order. Its effect is thus to require the provision of a domestic ren allowing the competent "national authorityll both to deal with the substance of the relevant Convention complaint and to grant approprj relief (see Eur Court HR, Vilvarajah and others v. the United judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 39, para. 122).

In the Commission's view, the remedies at the disposal of the applicant association under German law would have satisfied these requirements. The Commission adds that doubts as to the chance of success of an appeal which could remedy an alleged violation of the Convention are not sufficient to raise issues under Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention (see No. 10266/83, Dec. 9.7.84, D.R. 39 219) .

It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION·INADMISSIBLE.

H.C. KRUGER S. TRECHSEL Secretary President to the Commission of the

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 ...... **.. * * .. *

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

No. 36283/97 by Wolfgang, Ingrid, Maya and Iris KELLER against Germany

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) in private on 4 March 1998, the following members being present:

MM M.P. President N. ·BRATZA E. BUSUTTIL A. WEITZEL C.L. ROZAKIS Mrs J. LIDDY MM L. LOUCAIDES B. CONFORTI I. · G. RESS A. PERENIC C. K. HERNDL M. VlLA AMIGO Mrs M. HION Mr R. NICOLINI

Mrs M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber c

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protectic of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 15 May 1997 by Wolfgang, Ingrid, Maya and Iris KELLER against Germany and registere on 29 May 1997 under file No. 36283/97;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rule of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants are German citizens. The first and the second applicants, born in 1937 and 1950 respectively, ' are a married couple

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 The third and fourth applicants, born in 1981 and 1980, are their daughters. The applicants are members of Scientology, a world-wide organisation with its international headquarters in Los Angeles {United States of America}, and live in Schwabhausen {Germany}.

In proceedings before the Commission the applicants represented by Mr. Douwe Korff, a lawyer and lecturer at Cambridge University (United Kingdom) .

The facts of the case as submitted by the applicants may be summarised as follows.

Members of the Federal Parliament (Bundestag) in Bonn and of Parliaments of the Lander discussed repeatedly the question of Scientology. They warned that Scientology was particularly and considered that it did not constitute a church but instead was more like a commercial enterprise.

The Federal Government and the Governments of the Lander adoptE joint strategies with a view to reducing the influence of organisations. In various Lander measures were taken to reduce the influence of Scientology and to warn of its dangers.

The Government of the Land of Bavaria ordered schools to infom pupils of all ages and their parents about the goals, strategies operating procedures of Scientology.

In April 1996, the Bavarian Ministry of Education (Bayerisches' Staatsministerium Kultus, Wissenschaft und Kunst) published in t issue of the magazine Schulreport (school report) of 1996 (issue 1/96) pages 8 to 10 an article entitled "All clear? Information about Scientology" {IlAlles Clear? Informationen 90,000 copies of this report were printed' and, apart from copies, distributed to Bavarian schools. The article abot Scientology was also' used for teaching purposes in Bavarian schools.

On May and June 1996 the applicants to the Administrative Court (Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht Munchen) for ar interim injunction (einstweilige Anordnung) restraining the Bavariar Government (Freistaat Bayern) from disseminating the issue of the magazine Schulreport of April 1996 and, to the extent it had been disseminated, from any longer using it for teaching purposeso! making it accessible to others. Subsidiarily they requested an orde! restraining the dissemination of this article with 'the inclusion of various passages quoted by them, including the following:

"With a crude mixture of science fiction, psychoanalysis and manipulative practices of totalitarian systems members of Scientology are made dependent and their financial and working capacities are systematically exploited.

Scientology uses techniques mental control based on deceptic and manipulation.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 Recognising a Scientology member:

In some cases the behaviour of a person changes as a result of the mind control exercised over a period of several months, mOl typically however within a few days or weeks. Interestingly, members develop towards a standard personality (standardisatior of personality attributes of the sect members). From the physic point of view the following signs are identified as the result of membership of the sect: a change in weight (corpulence, anorexia), loss of strength, altered beard-growth, exhaustion syndrome and psychosomatic illness. Psychological effects are manifested, inter alia, in a narrowing and weakening of the process of thinking (differentiation of language and metaphors or irony, replaced by the use of sect-internal cliches), in thE changing of emotional state, in strong changes of emotions and in non-characteristic anti-social behaviour. The occurrenCE of hallucinations can also be observed, because daily excessivE auditing can make a person psychologically and physically . addicted to this psycho-technique. This often has damaging sidE effects, such lowering of cognitive abilities, for example weak concentration and decision-making. A radical change of personality is the most revealing sign that a totalitarian grol is at work. . .. "

The applicants also refer to comic-strip pictures drawn by schoolchildren and reproduced on page 9 with the title "Scientologyl' and on page 10 with the title "Scientology No!"

In their submissions to the Munich Administrative Court the applicants argued in particular that the article about Scientology violated the constitutional requirement of State neutrality in matte of religion and that the article not factual and offensive.

On 29 July 1996; the Munich Administrative Court rejected the applicants' request on the ground that the were not personally affected by the contested passages and pictures which not concern all the members of the Scientology organisation. The COL pointed out that Scientology was an organisation which - according t information in the contested article - had approximately eightmillj members world-wide. It was therefore an indeterminable group of persons, with regard to which negative statements, which were not directed at individually determinable members, were lost in the gene multitude of persons, and which therefore did not have any concrete effect on individual members. The court further noted that some of t passages invoked by the applicants had not been quoted correctly.

On 20 August 1996, the applicants appealed against this decisic They submitted detailed reasons for the appeal on 27 August 1996 made supplementary submissions on 10 'September 1996. The applicants again argued that the article violated their human rights, and more specifically their right as to educate their children in accordance with their beliefs, and insofar as their rights as childl

http ://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=l&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 were concerned, the right of children to respect for their beliefs.

On 27 September 1996, the Bavarian Administrative Court of Appe (Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof) dismissed the appeal.

The court, relying on rulings by various German courts, includj the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), the Federal ·Cour t of Justice tBundesgerichtshof) and the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), dealt in some detaj with the German legal approach to the question of when an individua] can be regarded as being directly affected (unmittelbar betroffen) a general statement about a group. The court stated, inter alia:

"When defamatory statements are made about a group the latter c have a right to apply for a restraining injunction (Unterlassungsanspruch). This is to be distinguished from the legal position of a member of the group who seeks an injunctior .prohibit ing specific statements, not on behalf of the group, bt who claims his individual rights have been affected. The larger the group is, to which the negative statement relates, t less the individual member may be personally affected, because negative statements about large groups mostly concern not individual wrongdoing or individual characteristics of the members, but rather the worthlessness, in the view of the persc the statements, of the collective and its functic as well as the associated behavioural demands of the members. C the imaginary scale, at one end of which stands the individual " defamation of a named or identifiable single person, one can fj at the other end the negative value-judgmental. statement about human characteristics in general, or criticism of social or matters, are no longer capable of affecting the honOUl of the individual (cf. BVerfG NJW 1995, 3303/3306). Someone whc wants to make a negative statement about a group, is however ir principie also for avoidable effects of his statements on the honour of a person who, while not as such intended to be the target of the attack, nonetneless comes in t way of the attack (cf. BGH NJW 1982, 1805). The intention of publisher of the magazine "Schulreport", to inform about and against the ScientologyOrganisation, therefore does not necessarily preclude that the claimants individually affected. These could however only demand an injunction against certain statements to the extent these statements - at also - directly affect their strictly personal legal position (cf. BGH NJW 1980, 1790; BVerwG DQV 1984, 940 concerning the appeal against the prohibition of an association). It does not suffice if they are merely indirectly affected. The criminal protection of the honour and the civil law of the personality have been limited with regard to persons who might be defamed as an indirect result of a statement directed at someone else, in order not to destroy the system rights regardj the protection of personal integrity (BGH NJW 1980, 1790). The situation concerning the protection of personal . integrity in

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intJhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 public law can be no different. If a pejorative statement is about a group, then a member of the group can only seek a against this in his own name, when the statement involves a criterion which is manifestly applicable to all the members of the group (cf. BayObLG NJW 1990, 1724; BayVGH NVwZ 1994, BayVBl 1995, 564).

The Administrative Court of Appeal examined the various statements about Scientology and Scientologists in the article specifically criticised by the applicants, but concluded that these concerned Scientology as an organisation or group, and could not be said to have directly affected the applicants. According to the COUl it moreover not been claimed that the children had been direct confronted with the article in the schoolteaching they received, or that this was likely in the immediate future.

On 30 October 1996, the applicants lodged a constitutional appe with ,t he Federal Constitutional Court. They stressed that injunctive relief was the only effective remedy in cases concerning the educatj of children, since proceedings in the main action would last for a ] period, and would not be terminated until the children had finished their school education.

On the article itself, the applicants submitted that the depiction of Scientologists as standard personalities with characteristics such as obesity/anorexia, loss of strength and altel beard-growth, whose thinking processes were narrowed and weakened, who were held up as conditioned and brain-washed IIzombies ll without will, well as the assessment of the applicants' beliefs as lIa crl mixture of science fiction, psychoanalysis and manipulative practice of totalitarian systems" was not a neutral, factual, true and informing of schoolchildren.

The applicants further argued that they were directly affected by the contested because, like all Scientologists, they wel depicted as victims of manipulation, mind control and indoctrinatior and as mentally inferior human beings. Their capacity to think for themselves was denied, and their religious beliefs were derided. According to them, the State, through the publication of the article directly attempted to indoctrinate teachers and school-children, by creating fear and panic. The educational environment of their daught was no longer characterised by tolerance and peaceful coexistence bl by hatred and The parents had to fear for an estrangement from their children, under the influence of -the State. They that the article prejudiced their rights as parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious and philosophical convictions and of the children's right be educated in an environment that was open and tolerant towards the beliefs.

Sitting as a panel of three members, on 19 November 1996 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to accept the case for adjudication.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=1&ActiQn=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/200 COMPLAINTS

The applicants complain that they do not have remedy the information campaign conducted by the Bavarian authorities and n specifically that they have been denied an effective remedy against dissemination and promotion of a highly defamatory article in the magazine Schulreport, which was the centre-piece of the overall governmental campaign Scientology and its members. The applicants maintain that they are victims of a violation of .their rj to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and the first and second applicant of their right to ensure the education and of children in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.

Referring to the cases of Klass and Malone (Eur Court HR, and others v. Germany of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28; Malone v. United Kingdom of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82) they consider themselves to be directly affected by the campaign directly targeted at a specific minority community, in the course of which the members of that community were described as either brain-c zombies 'or demonic manipulators of enslaved victims. In their they are targeted and ostracised. In 11enlightenment 11 evenings and citizen's initiatives against Scientology they are denounced/by name and their house is referred to in the local press as a lair of Scientologists.

The applicants allege a violation of Article 90f the Conventic and of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1. They also invoke Article 13 of t Convention.

THE LAW

1. The applicants complain that they are the victims of the information campaign in Bavaria concerning Scientology and in particular of an article published in the April 1996 issue of the magazine Schulreport on this organisation. They submit. that the arti constitutes a direct attack - couched in prejudiced and unnecessari1 offensive terms - on the peaceful enjoyment of their right to thougr conscience and religion as guaranteed by Article 9 (Art. 9) of the Convention.

The applicants also complain that the contested article was expressly intended to inculcate in all Bavarian schools an atmosphel of rejection and of intolerance towards the religious beliefs of the first and second applicant and affected their right. as parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in accordance wi their own religious and philosophical convictions, as guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2).

The Commission has first examined to what extent the laid down in Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention have met in the present case.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 - .- , --

Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention provides:

liThe Commission may receive petitions addressed to . the Secretal General of the Council of Europe from any person, non governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Partie of the rights set forth in this Convention, provided that the High Contracting against complaint has been lodged has declared that it recognises the competence of the Commission to receive such petitions. 11

Commission recalls that, in order for applicants to be able to avail themselves of this provision, they must fulfil two conditic they must fall into one of the categories of applicants referred to that provision and must be able to claim to be a victim of a violation of the Convention.

As regards the first condition,the Commission notes that the applicants, as private persons, clearly fall into the categories of applicants mentioned in Article (Art. 25) of the Convention.

As for the second condition, the Commission recalls that the concept of"victim" as · used in Article (Art. 25) of the Conventic must be interpreted autonomously independently of concepts of domestic law.

The Commission further recalls that an applicant cannot claim be the victim of a breach of the rights or freedoms protected by the Convention unless there is a sufficiently direct connection between applicant as such and the injury he maintains he suffered as a resu] of the alleged breach (No. 10733/84, Dec. 11.3.85, D.R. 41, p. 211).

The Commission that the article complained of information about Scientology and members of this world-wide organisation in general and is not aimed at any identifiable person belonging to that organisation. Although the applicants refer to negative attitude of their neighbourhood and the local press them, the Commission finds that there is no indication in the file t this conduct is a result of the information disseminated about Scientology, . i n particular of the article complained of. The therefore finds that the effects of the contested measures are of a indirect and remote nature as to affect the applicants' rights unde! Article 9 (Art. 9) of the Convention.

Furthermore, there is no indication in the case file that the first and second applicant's children have ever been confronted in t schoolteaching they received with the contested article or that the} risk being subjected to indoctrination that might be considered as r respecting parents' religious and philosophical convictions (see Eu! Court HR, Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, 26, para. 53).

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm.1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

2. The applicants finally complain under Article 13 (Art. 13) of t Convention that they do not have any remedy against the information campaign of the German authorities and that they have been denied ar effective remedy against the dissemination of the contested article . . Article 13 (Art. 13) reads as follows:

"Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention violated shall have an effective remedy before national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity."

However, the Commission recalls that Article 13 (Art. 13) of Convention has no application where, as in the present case, the mai complaint is outside the scope of the Convention (see No. 9984/82, r 17.10.85, D.R. 44" p. 54).

It "f ol l ows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

M.F. BUQUICCHIO M.P. Secretary President to the First Chamber of the First Chamber

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 ITo all related English documents

htlp:/lhudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewNav.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423&... 13/08/2003 AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 34614/97 by KIRCHE DEUTSCHLAND e.V. against Germany

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 7 April 1997, the following members being present:

Mr. S. TRECHSEL, President Mrs. G.H. THUNE Mrs. J. LIDDY MM. A. S. A. WEITZEL J.-C. SOYER H. DANELIUS F. MARTINEZ C.L. ROZAKIS L. LOUCAIDES J. -C. GEUS M.P. B. MARXER M.A. NOWICKI I. CABRAL BARRETO B. CONFORTI I. J. MUCHA D. G. A. PERENIC C. P. LORENZEN K. HERNDL E. BIELIUNAS E.A. ALKEMA M. VlLA AMIGO Mrs. M. HION MM. R. NICOLINI A. ARABADJIEV

Mr. H.C. KRUGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protectic of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedomsi

Having regard to the application introduced on 20 January 1997 by SCIENTOLOGY KIRCHE DEUTSCHLAND e.V. against Ger.many and registere on 28 January 1997 under file No. 34614/97 ; http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE, FACTS

The applicant is a registered association (eingetragener Vereir under German law which has its seat in Munich (Munchen). It is represented by its President, Mr. Helmuth B16baum, who retained Mr. Douwe Korff, a lawyer and lecturer of Cambridge (United Kingdom), tc act as counsel.

The of the case as submitted by the applicant associatior may be summarised as follows.

The applicant association is part of Scientology, a world-wide organisation with its international headquarters in Los Angeles (Uni States of America). It has Scientology organisations in several citi in Germany.

The applicant association submits that for many years itself ar its approximately 30iOOO members, including children, parents, businessmen and members of political parties, have been subjected German government bodies and officials to a campaign of religious intolerance and human rights violations. In this context the association refers in particular to the following events which took place during the period from April 1991 to May 1996:

Members of the Federal Parliament (Bundestag) in Bonn and of Parliaments of the Lander discussed repeatedly the question of Scientology. They warned Scientology was particularly dangerouE and considered that it did not constitute a church but instead was n more like a commercial enterprise with political claims for the absolute truth without regard for the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the individual. The Federal Government and the GovernmentE of the Lander were requested to take action to counteract Scientolc expansion, namely to withdraw the legal capacity from Scientology organisations, to initiate criminal investigations against Scientolc to determine if adherence to Scientology can be classified as drugli addiction, to increase the information about Scientology in schools, governmental offices and in public, to prevent the economic influenc of Scientology in coordination with the Employers Association and Chambers for Industry, Commerce and Trade and to work out a list of other measures designed for the reduction of Scientology activities.

The leading German political parties declared that membership i the applicant association was incompatible with the tenets of their parties. Members of the political were requested either to leave the parties or Scientology. All levels of'society were called

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 upon to dismiss Scientologists from their social positions and fron jobs, including in schools, and to boycott companies owned by Scientologists as well as Scientology artists.

The Federal Government and the Governments of the Lander adopte joint strategies with a view to reducing the influence of organisations. A national documentation and information centre and permanent interministerial working group were established to ensure that coordinated actions Scientology were discussed. Scientology was considered to be the biggest and most dangerous sect in Germany engaged in infiltrating the economy by its members joinir unions and becoming employees of companies. "It was proposed to investigate whether Scientology was a criminal organisation and how counteract Scientology under health, healing practitioner and drug laws. The Permanent Conference of Ministers of the Interior of the Lander recommended a series of measures to oppose Scientology, including a recommendation that Government offices in the area of fiscal affairs place a declaratory clause in contracts with companie doing business with the Government to ensure that no business is dor with Scientologists. The Prime Ministers of the meeting in Berlin endorsed this recommendation and felt it necessary that the Federal Government,Governments of the Lander and local would warn of the practices of Scientology and use all legally possi ways to counter this worldwide operating organisation's objective of domination.

In a foreword of information leaflet published in January . 19 96 , the Federal Minister for Families, Pensioners, Women and (Bundesministerin Familie, Senioren, Frauen 'und Jugend) stated t many persons being affected by the dubious practices and activities the Scientology organisation had asked for her help and advice. According to her, this organisation was not a religious or community, but a commercial organisation.

In various measures were taken to reduce the influence c Scientology and to warn of its dangers.

In Stuttgart decree was issued prohibiting the public distribution of printed matters published by Scientology organisatic

http ://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Htm1&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 Government ,o f f i c i a l s and executives of well-known companies informed German business leaders on such topics as the use sect filters", ways of identifying and dismissing Scientologists and tact to repair the economic damage when a company was blacklisted 'be c au s E it was suspected of employing members of such an association. A decl was issued by the Federal Minister of Labour preventing from obtaining licences necessary to operate emploYment agencies.

Non-governmental organisations, such as the Circle of German Brokers (Ring Deutscher Makler), an association composed 4,000 real estate brokers, announced that it would require all membe of the Circle to sign a declaration attesting that they did not fol] the teachings of the founder of Scientology in order to be sure not have any Scieritologists among its members. Real estate brokers and tenants associations, supported by the working group "Scientology" c the Hamburg Ministry of the Interior, published a list of suspected Scientologists and their real estate concerns, exhorted the public t boycott 'a l l Scientology businesses, and urged banks to refuse to do business with Scientologists. Banks refused to grant loans to Scientologists and informed the press that they would not do with members of Scientology organisations. As a result of the negat publicity, a bank cancelled its bank card agreement with the Church Scientology of Frankfurt.

Other commercial associations urged businessmen to include clauses in contracts requiring business partners to declare that the were Scientologists.

Furthermore, as part of the Government's information programme, established Churches were called upon to act in cooperation when dealing with new religious movements.

In a civil action brought against the association "Scientology Kirche Hamburg e. V." by one of its members, the Federal Labour Cc (Bundesarbeitsgericht), in a decision of 22 March 1995, considered t the case concerned a dispute between employee and and was within the competence of the labour courts. Having examined in detaj the structure, and practices of Scientology, the Federal Laboul Court concluded that the association was not a religious or philosophical community within the meaning of the Law (Grundgesetz), but commercial organisation.

More recently, in August 1996, the Bavarian Government announCE that Scientologists be banned from civil The Christic Democratic Union (Christlich Oemokratische Union Deutschlands - COU) and the Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands - SPD) in Lower-Saxony declared that they had agreed Scientologists were not welcome in public service and that prospectj Government employees and companies doing business with the State declare that they were not associated with Scientology. The CDU Yout Organisation (Junge Union Deutschlands), COU and SPD officials calle for a boycott of two films in which Scientologists performed roles. In the Landerof Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate politicianE

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Htm1&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 demanded that Government funding for cultural and artistic events be prohibited if Scientologists would perform there.

As from 1 November 1996 the Government of Bavaria requires all persons seeking employment in the public sector to fill out a questionnaire regarding their association with Scientology and affil that they disassociate themselves from Scientology. In other Lander similar measures were adopted. The Land of Berlin sent a form to al] contractual partners authorities requiring each that does business with the Land of Berlin to declare in writing they were not associated with Sciento1ogy. The Land of Hamburg requi teachers to sign such forms.

The applicant association further refers to numerous incidents of boycotting Scientologists and dismissing members of Sciento1ogy their functions, such as sportsmen, managers and businessmen. Childl of Scientologists were expelled from nursery and private schools from sports clubs.

The applicant association submits finally that in 1995 and the Sciento1ogy organisations in and Munich received over te bomb threats. Further anonymous threats of violence from Neo-Nazi groups were received by Sciento1ogy organisations in other German cities.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant association complains, both in its own a religious organisation and on behalf of its members, of the victim of an unparalleled campaign of discrimination, exclusion and intimidation, carried out, condoned and encouraged by German authorities. The campaign as such, it is said, discloses serious and continuing violations of the Convention.

Referring to case of Donnelly and six others v. the United Kingdom (Nos. 5577-5583/72, Dec. 15.12.75, D.R. 4 p. 4), the applicant association submits that it and its members _are the victin of an administrative practice against which there is no effective remedy. The administrative practice on the part of the respondent Government renders the remedies which are available in individual cases, but which are not susceptible of stopping the policy or practice, inadequate in the present case. The applicant association alleges that the administrative practice continues to this day and t it and its members are therefore the victims of an ongoing violatior of the Convention. On both of these grounds the application cannot rejected on the basis of Article 26 of the Convention.

The applicant association maintains that Scientology is not an unlawful organisation, is not operating against the law and is also contrary to the constitutional of the Federal Republic of Germany. Nevertheless Scientology is regarded as an enemy of the The applicant association further submits that the Church of Scientology is a bona fide religion, that it is' a commercial

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802,... 13/08/2003 organisation and that its ethical standards fully uphold human dignj and respect for the law. The campaign of which it is a victim is in submissions alarmingly similar to actions taken by the Nazis .against Jewish people and minority religions in the 1930s, preceding the Holocaust, and to attacks made by German authorities in the 1950s ar 1960s against communists or anyone deemed sYmpathetic to left-wing terrorists in the 1970s .

.: The ·applicant associ.eni.on alleges that the campaign in general as well as the information campaigns, the use of "Anti-Scientology Forms", the improper determination of the legitimacy of its beliefs, violate the non-derogatory, untouchable core of Article 9 para. 1 of the Convention. It refers in this context to the Otto-Preminger Institut v. Austria judgment given by the European Court of Human Rights on 20 September 1994 (Series A no. 295-A) and stresses that States have a positive obligation under Article 9 para. 1 of the Convention to secure the peaceful enjoYment of religious freedom fre attacks by others. In the present case, however, the German State, rather than protecting the applicant association from attacks, endOl such attacks and joins them. Furthermore, the measures taken as part of the campaign are not · "prescribed by law" and are, in any case, grossly disproportionate and unnecessary in a democratic society, ir violation of para. 2 of this provision.

The applicant association further complains that the campaign predictable and serious effects on the private life of Scientology members. These effects are grossly disproportionate and destructive the private and family lives of the persons affected and violate Article 8 of the Convention.

Furthermore the measures taken against members of Scientology c the mere basis of their membership of that organisation, without consideration of their individual actions and in spite of the fact t Scientology is lawful, violate Article 10 of the Convention general] The actions taken against artists, musicians and actors, on the sole basis of their affiliation with Scientology infringe the rights of t affected individuals to freedom of artistic expression; in violatior of Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention.

The information campaigns in schools directly infringe the of Scientology parents to have their children educated in accordance with their beliefs, in violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1.

The systematic attempts to exclude Scientologists from all majc political parties, which, according to the applicant association, quasi-public status under German law, on the sole basis of their religious beliefs, is an attempt to exclude members of Scientology f the political life of the nation in violation of Article 3 of Protoc

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Htm1&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 No. 1, as well as of Article 11 of the Convention. These attempts amount to an abuse by the political parties in question of the right to freedom of association, in violation of Article 17 of the Convention.

The applicant association also submits that there is no effectj remedy against either the administrative policy of the respondent Government or the fundamental political assessment which lies at roots. The applicant alleges a violation of Article 13 c the Convention.

THE LAW

1. The applicant association alleges that itself and its members a group are the victims of an administrative practice of violations Articles 8, 9, 10, 11 and 17 (Art. 8, 9, 10, 11, 17) of the Conventi and of Articles 3 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2, Pl-3), separately in conjunction with Articles 13 and 14 (Pl-2+Pl-3+13+14) of the Convention.

The Commission has first examined to what extent the laid ,down in Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention have met in the present case.

Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of ·the Convention provides:

"The Commission may receive petitions addressed to the SecretaI General of the Council of Europe from any person, non governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to the victim a violation by one of the High Contracting Partie of the rights set forth in this Convention, provided that the High Contracting Party against which the complaint has been lodged has declared that it recognises the competence of the Commission to receive such petitions. ( ... )"

The Commission recalls that, in order for applicants to be able to avail themselves of this provision, they must fulfil two conditic they must fall into one of the categories of applicants referred to Article 25 (Art. 25) and they must have a claim tO,be a·victim of a violation of the Convention.

As regards the first condition, the Commission notes that the applicant association is an association of individuals as defined German domestic law. As such it clearly falls into one of the categories of applicants in Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention, namely that of a non-governmental organisation.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 As for the second condition, the Commission recalls that the concept of "victim" as used in Article 25 (Art. 25) the Conventic must be interpreted autonomously and independently of concepts of domestic law such as capacity to bring or to take part in legal proceedings.

An applicant cannot claim to be the victim of a breach of the rights or freedoms ,protected by the Convention unless there is a sufficiently direct between the as such and the injury he maintains he suffered as a result of the alleged breach. ] particular, according to the established case-law of the Commission, a corporate applicant cannot claim to be itself a victim of measures alleged to have interfered with the Convention rights of its indivic members (cf. No. 9939/82, Dec. 4.7.83, D.R. 34 p. 213; No. 10733/84, Dec. 11.. 3.85, D.R. 41 p , 211; No. 18598/91, Dec. 18.5.94, D.R. 78 71, 72; No. 24581/94, Dec. 6.4.95, D.R. 81 pp. 123, 126).

In the present case it is clearly not the applicant associatior as such which is the victim of the alleged violations of the guaranteed Article 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention (respect for life) and of 2 and 3 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2, Pl-3) (parent right to educate their children in conformity with their religious philosophical convictions and right to free elections). Solely the members of the applicant association, as individuals, could claim tc be victims of a violation of these rights, which by their nature are not susceptible of being exercised by an association.

The Commission notes that the association claims alsc to represent its members as alleged victims of a violation of these a number of other rights enshrined in the Convention. However, the applicant association has not identified these individuals and in ar event has not shown that it has received specific instructions from of them (cf No. 10983/84, Dec. 12.5.86, D.R.47p. 225).

It follows that c Lnaofar as the application alleges violations c the rights of the applicant association's individual members, it is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Conventj

2. ,Insofar as the applicant association alleges to be itself the victim of a violation of Ar.ticles 9, 10, 11, 14 and 17 (Art. 9, 10, 11, 14, 17) of the Convention, the Commission notes to a large extent it complains of the conduct of members of parliament, political parties, commercial companies and other non organisations or private persons. However, 'according tc Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention, the Commission can only deal with applications alleging a violation of Convention rights by a Contracting Party to the Convention, i.e. a violation claimed to been committed by State bodies. By contrast, it may not receive applications directed against private individuals or private enterprises or private law corporations. In this respect the Commiss refers to its established case-law (No. 11002/84, Dec. 8.3.85, D.R. p. 264; No. 11590/85, Dec. 18.7.86, D.R. 48 p. No. 12327/86, De

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 11.10.88, D.R. 58 p. 85).

The applicant association's complaints of violations of its Convention rights by the above non-governmental bodies or persons therefore incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected under Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

3. may nevertheless be invoked before the Commissic it claimed that State has failed in its duty to protect the' Convention rights of an applicant against interferences 'by persons or institutions, provided that a positive obligation of the State in this repect can be derived from the particular provision of the Convention at issue (cf. e.g. No. 8282/78, Dec. 14.7.80, D.R. 2] p. 109; No. 12242/86, Dec. 6.9.1989, D.R. 62 p. 151; Eur. Court HR, Kokkinakis v. Greece judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A, p. 21, para. 48; Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria judgment of 20 September 1994, Series A no. 295-A, p. 18, para. 47). The Commissic notes that in the present case the applicant association indeed a claim of the State having failed in accomplishing its positive obligations under the Convention, and in particular under Article 9 (Art. 9) thereof. Apart from that, it is not clear from the general submissions of the applicant association what specific acts might constituted a direct interference by the German State authorities wj the applicant association's rights.

However, in any event, the Commission is not required to decide whether or not the facts alleged by the applicant association disclc any appearance of a violation of the Convention as, under Article 2E (Art. 26) of the Convention, it may only deal with the matter after domestic remedies have been exhausted, according to the generally recognised rules of international law, and within a period of six months from the date on which the final decision was taken.

The Commission observes that domestic remedies have been exhausted if, before the highest authority, the applicant has raisec at least in substance, the complaint he makes before Commission (cf. No. 17128/90, Dec. 10.7.91, D.R. 71 p. 275). The Commission recalls in this respect that Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention intended to provide national authorities with the opportunity of remedying violations alleged by an applicant (Eur. Court HR, Lopez Ostra v. Spain judgment of December 1994, Series A no. 303-C, p. para. 38).

The Commission notes that in the present case the rights invoke by the applicant association are also guaranteed by the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz). Insofar as the applicant association has or might have,seized the competent courts, for instance by lodging an interin injunction (einstweilige Anordnung) and introducing main before the administrative courts with a view to prohibiting certain statements or publications concerning its activities, it could subsequently also have lodged a constitutional appeal with the Fede! Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) 'in accordance with t

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802•... '13108/2003 relevant prov1s1ons of the Basic Law and the Act on the Federal Constitutional Court (Gesetz daa Bundesverfassungsgericht). Thj remedy would have been available, for instance, in respect of the decision of the Federal Labour Court of March 1995. However, the applicant association has not shown that it has ever resorted to sue a remedy.

The Commission finds therefore that in the present case the domestic authorities afforded the opportunity to rectify violations of the Convention alleged by the applicant association.

The applicant association submits that it was under no obligatj to exhaust domestic remedies since any remedy in the circumstances of the be inadequate and ineffective, having to the alleged existence of an administrative practice of the Germar authorities.

It is true that Article 26 (Art. 26) of the Convention only requires the exhaustion of such remedies as relate to the alleged breaches of the Convention and at the same time can provide effecti' and sufficient redress. An applicant does not need to exercise which, although theoretically of a nature to constitute a remedy, de not in reality offer any chance of redressing the alleged breach (cf No. 9248/81, Dec. 10.10.83, D.R. 34 78; Eur. Court HR, Akdivar ar others v. Turkey judgment of 16 1996, to be published in Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996, para. 66).

However, there is no indication in ,t he present case that the domestic remedies, which were at the disposal of the applicant association under German law, are not effective remedies in practice to remedy the situation complained of. In particular, the Commissior finds nothing to support the>applicant allegation that there exists an administrative practice in Germany which would make judicial remedies ineffective. Moreover, the existence of doubt as the chances of success of a domestic remedy does not exempt an applicant from the obligation to exhaust it {cf., No. 13669/8E Dec. 7.3.90, D.R. 65 p. 245}.

Therefore, an examination of the application by the Commission not disclose the existence of any special circumstances which might have absolved the applicant association, according to the generally recognised rules of international law, from exhausting the domestic remedies at its disposal.

It follows that the applicant association has not complied the condition as to the exhaustion of domestic remedies, and this of the application must therefore be rejected under Article 27 para. (Art. 27-3) of the Convention.

4. The applicant association finally complains under Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention that no effective remedy was at its disposal to assert its Convention 'rights before the national authorities of Ger.many.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 Article 13 (Art. 13) as follows:

IIEveryone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.1I

The Commission that Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention guarantees the availability of a remedy at national leve] to enforce the substance of the Convention rights and freedoms in whatever form they may happen to be secured in the domestic legal Its effect is thus to require the provision of a domestic ren allowing the competent IInational authorityll both to deal with the substance of the relevant Convention complaint and to grant approprj relief (see Eur. Court HR, Vilvarajah and others v. the United judgment of 30 October 1991, Series A no. 215, p. 39, para. 122).

It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

H.C. KRUGER S. TRECHSEL Secretary President to the Commission of the Commission

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=O&Action=Html&X=813131802.... 13/08/2003 -

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

No. 36283/97 by Wolfgang, Ingrid, Maya and Iris KELLER against Germany

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) in private on 4 March 1998, the following members being present:

MM M.P. President N. BRATZA E. BUSUTTIL A. WEITZEL C.L. ROZAKIS Mrs J. LIDDY MM L. LOUCAIDES B. CONFORTI I. G. RESS A. PERENIC C. K. HERNDL M. VILA AMIGO Mrs M. HION Mr R. NICOLINI

Mrs M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protectic of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

'Having regard to the application introduced on 15 May 1997 by Wolfgang, Ingrid, Maya and Iris KELLER against Germany and registere on 29 May 1997 under file No. 36283/97;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rule of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

,THE FACTS

The applicants are German citizens. The first and the second applicants, born in 1937 and 1950 respectively,' are a married couple

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=l&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 The third and fourth applicants, born in 1981 and 1980, are their daughters. The applicants are members of Scientology, a world-wide organisation with its international headquarters in Los Angeles (United States of America), and live in Schwabhausen (Germany).

In the proceedings before the Commission the applicants represented by Mr. Douwe Korff, a lawyer and lecturer at Cambridge University (United Kingdom) . . The facts of the case as submitted by the applicants may be summarised as follows.

Members of the Federal Parliament (Bundestag) in Bonn and of Parliaments of the discussed repeatedly the question of Scientology. They that Scientology was particularly and considered that it did not constitute a church but instead was n more like a commercial enterprise.

The Government of the Land of Bavaria ordered schools to inforn pupils of all ages and their parents about the goals, strategies operating procedures of Scientology.

In April 1996, the Bavarian Ministry of Education (Bayerisches Staatsministerium Kultus, Wissenschaft und Kunst) published in t issue of the magazine Schulreport (school report) of April 1996 (issue 1/96) on pages 8 to 10 an article entitled "All clear? Information about Scientology" ("Alles Clear? Informationen Scientology"). 90,000 copies of this report were printed and, apart from 2,200 copies, c;listributed to Bavarian schools. The article abot Scientology was also used for teaching purposes in Bavarian schools.

On 23 May and 28 June 1996 the applicants applIed to the Administrative Court (Bayerisches Verwaltungsgericht Munchen) for ar interim injunction (einstweilige Anordnung) restraining the Bavariar Government (Freistaat Bayern) from disseminating the issue of" the magazine Schulreport of April 1996 and, to the extent it had been disseminated, from any longer using it for teaching purposes 01 making it accessible to others. Subsidiarily they requested an ordeI restraining the dissemination of this article with "t he inclusion of various passages quoted by them, including the following:

Scientology uses techniques of mental control based on deceptic ' and manipulation.

httn·/lhllnoc..echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=I&Action=Htm1&X=813132423•... 13/08/2003 Recognising a Scientology member:

In some cases the behaviour of a person changes as a result of the mind control exercised over a period of several months, typically however within a few days or weeks. Interestingly, members develop towards a standard personality (standardisatior of personality attributes of the sect members). From the physic point of view the signs are identified as the result of membership of the sect: a change in weight (corpulence, anorexia), loss of strength, altered beard-growth, exhaustion sYndrome and psychosomatic illness. Psychological effects are manifested, inter alia, in a narrowing and weakening of the process of thinking (differentiation of language and metaphors or irony, replaced by the use of sect-internal cliches), in the changing of the emotional state, in strong changes of emotions . and in non-characteristic anti-social behaviour. The occurrence of hallucinations can also be observed, because daily excessive auditing can make a person psychologically and physically addicted to this psycho-technique. This often has damaging effects, such as lowering of cognitive abilities, for example weak concentration and decision-making. A radical change of personality is the most revealing sign that a totalitarian grot . is at work. . .. "

The applicants also refer to comic-strip pictures drawn by schoolchildren and reproduced on page 9 with the title "Scientologyr and on page 10 with the title "Scientology No!"

In their submissions to the Munich Administrative Court the applicants argued in particular that the article about Scientology violated the constitutional requirement of State neutrality in matte religion and that the article was not factual and offensive.

On 29 July 1996; the Munich Administrative Court rejected the applicants' request on the ground that the applicants were not personally affected by the contested passages and pictures which not concern all the members of the Scientology organisation. The COt pointed out that Scientologywas an organisation which - according t information in the contested article - had approximately eight milli members world-wide. It was therefore an indeterminable group of persons, with regard to which negative statements, which were not directed at individually determinable members, were lost in the gene multitude of persons, and which therefore did not have any concrete effect on individual members. The court further noted that some of t passages invoked by the applicants had not been quoted correctly.

On 20 August 1996, the applicants appealed against this decisic They submitted detailed reasons for the appeal on 27 August 1996 made supplementary submissions on 10 September 1996. The applicants again argued that the article violated their human rights, and more specifically their right as parents to educate their children in accordance with their beliefs, and insofar as their rights as childI

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 were concerned, the right of children to respect for their beliefs.

On 27 September 1996, the Bavarian Administrative Court of AppE (Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof) dismissed the appeal.

The court, relying on rulings by various German courts, includj the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), the Federal ·Court of Justice tBundesgerichtshof) and the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), dealt in detaj the German legal approach to the question of when an individua1 can be regarded as being directly affected (unmittelbar betroffen) . a general statement about a group. The court stated, inter alia:

"When defamatory statements are made about a group the latter c have a right to for a restraining injunction (Unterlassungsanspruch). This is to be distinguished from the legal position of a member of the group who seeks an injunctior prohibiting specific statements, not on behalf of the group, bt who claims that his individual rights have been affected. The larger the group is, to which the negative statement relates, t less the individual member may be personally affected, because negative statements about large groups mostly concern not individual wrongdoing or individual characteristics of the members, but rather the worthlessness, in the view of the persc making the statements, of the collective and its social functic as well as the associated behavioural demands of the members. C the imaginary scale, at one end of which stands the individual defamation of a named or identifiable single person, one can fj at the other end the negative value-judgmental statement about human characteristics in general, or criticism of social or matters, which are no longer capable of affecting the honouI of the individual (cf. BVerfG NJW 1995, 3303/3306). Someone whc wants to make a negative statement about a group, is however ir principle also responsible for avoidable effects of his statements on the honour of a person who, while not as such intended to be the target of the attack, nonetheless comes in t way of the attack (cf. BGH NJW 1982, 1805). The intention of publisher of the magazine "8chulreport", t.o inform about and against the Sciento1ogy Organisation, does not necessarily preclude that the claimants were individually affected. These could however only demand an injunction against certain statements to the extent that these statements at also -directly affect their strictly personal legal position (cf. BGH NJW 1980, 1790; BVerwG DOV 1984, 940 concerning the appeal against the prohibition of an association). It does not suffice if they are merely indirectly affected. The criminal protection of the honour and the civil law protection of the personality have been limited with regard to persons who might be defamed as an indirect result of a statement directed at someone else, in order not to destroy the system rights regardj the protection of personal integrity (BGH NJW 1980, 1790). The situation concerning the protection of personal integrity in

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=I&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 public law can be no different. If a pejorative statement is about a group, then a member of the group can only seek a against this in his own name, when the statement involves a criterion which manifestly applicable to all the members of the group (cf. BayObLG NJW 1990, 1724; BayVGH NVwZ 1994, 787; BayVBI 1995, 564).

The Administrative Court of Appeal examined the various statements about Scientolegy and Scientologists in the article specifically criticised by the applicants, but concluded that these concerned Scientology as an organisation or group, and could not be said to have directly affected the applicants. According to the it had moreover not been claimed that the children had been direct confronted with the article in the schoolteaching they received, or that this was likely in the immediate future.

On 30 October 1996, the applicants lodged a constitutional appe with the Federal Constitutional Court. stressed that injunctive relief was the only effective remedy in cases concerning the educatj of children, since proceedings in the main action would last for a ] period, and would not be terminated until the children had finished their school education.

On the article itself, the applicants submitted that the depiction of Scientologists as standard personalities with characteristics such as obesity/anorexia, loss of strength and beard-growth, whose thinking processes narrowed and weakened, who were held up as conditioned and brain-washed "zombies" without f will, as well as the assessment of the applicants' beliefs as "a crt mixture of science fiction, psychoanalysis and manipulative practice of totalitarian systems" was not a neutral, factual, true and tolerc informing of schoolchildren.

applicants further argued that they were directly affected by the contested article, because, all Scientologists, they we! depicted as victims of manipulation, mind control indoctrinatior and as mentally inferior human beings. Their capacity to think for themselves was denied, and their religious beliefs were derided. According to them, the State, through the publication of the article directly attempted to indoctrinate teachers and school-children, by creating fear and panic. The educational environment of their daught was no longer characterised by tolerance and peaceful coexistence by hatred and exclusion. The parents had to fear for an estrangement from their children, under the influence of the State. They emphasiE that the article prejudiced their rights as parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in with their religious and philosophical convictions and of the children's right be educated in an environment that was open and tolerant towards the beliefs.

Sitting as a panel of three members, on 19 November 1996 the Federal Constitutional Court declined to accept the case for adjudication.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423.... 13/08/2003 COMPLAINTS

The applicants complain that they do not have remedy the LnformatLon campaign conducted by the Bavarian authorities and n specifically that they have been denied an effective remedy against dissemination and promotion of a highly defamatory article in the magazine Schulreport, which was the of the overall campaign against Scientology and its members. The applicants maintain that they are victims ofa violation of .their ri to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and the and second applicant of their right to ensure the education and of their children in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.

Referring to the cases of Klass and Malone (Eur Court HR, and others v. Ger.many judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28; Malone v. United Kingdom judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82) they consider themselves to be directly affected by the campaign directly targeted at specific minority community, in the course which the members of that community were .des cr i bed as either brain-c zombies or demonic manipulators of enslaved victims. In their they are targeted and ostracised. In "enlightenment" evenings and citizen's initiatives against Scientology they are denounced by name and their house is referred to in the local press as a lair of Scientologists.

The applicants allege a violation of Article 9 of the Conventit and of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1. They also invoke Article 13 of t Convention.

THE LAW

1. The applicants complain that they are the victims the information in Bavaria concerning Scientology and in particular of an article published in the April 1996 issue of the magazine Schulreport on this organisation. They submit, that the arti constitutes a direct attack - couched in prejudiced and unnecessari] offensive terms - on the peaceful enjoYment of their right to thougt conscience and religion as guaranteed by Article 9 (Art. 9) of the Convention.

The applicants also complain that the contested article was expressly intended to inculcate in all Bavarian schools an atmospheI of rejection and of intolerance towards the, religious beliefs of the first and second applicant and affected their right as parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in accordance wi their own religious and philosophical convictions, as guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (Pl-2).

The Commission has first examined to what extent the conditionE laid down in Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention have met in the present case.

htto:1/hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 Article 25 para. 1 (Art. 25-1) of the Convention provides:

"The Commission may receive petitions addressed to the Secretal General of the Council of Europe from any person, non governmental organisation- or group of individuals claiming to the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Partie of the rights set forth in this Convention, provided that the High Contracting against which the complaint has been lodged has declared that it recognises the competence of the Commission receive such petitions. "

As regards the first condition, the Commission notes that the applicants, as private persons, clearly fall into the categories of applicants mentioned in Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention.

As for the second condition, the Commission recalls that the concept of "victim" as used in Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Conventic must be interpreted autonomously and independently of concepts of domestic law.

The Commission observes that the article complained of information about Scientology and members of this world-wide organisation in general and is not aimed at any person belonging to that organisation. Although the applicants refer to the negative attitude of their neighbourhood and the local press them, the Commission finds that there is no indication in the file t this conduct is a result of the information disseminated about Scientology, in particular of the article complained of. The therefore finds that the effects of the contested measures are of a indirect and remote nature as to affect the applicants' rights undel Article 9 (Art. 9) of the Convention.

Furthermore, there is no indication in the caSe file that the first and second applicant's children have ever been confronted in t schoolteaching they received with the contested article or that the} risk being subjected to indoctrination that might be considered as r respecting parents' religious and philosophical convictions (see EUl Court HR, Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23, p. 26, para. 53).

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/hudocNiewHtm1.asp?Item=1&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

Article 13 (Art. 13) reads as follows:

However, the Commission recalls that Article 13 (Art. 13) of Convention has no application where, as in the present case, the maj complaint is outside the scope of the Convention (see No. 9984/82, I 17.10.85, D.R. 44, p . 54).

It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

M.F. BUQUICCHIO M.P. Secretary President to the First Chamber of the First Chamber·

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewHtml.asp?Item=l&Action=Html&X=813132423,... 13/08/2003 ITa all related English documents •

http://hudoc.echr.coe.intlhudocNiewNav.asp?Item=1&Action=HtmI&X=813132423&... 13/0812003 ADVISORY BOARD (CHAIR) Yuri Orlov Karl von Schwarzenberg Ludmilla Alexeyeva

INTERNATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE VICE PRESIDENT Aaron Rhodes Sonja Biserko Ulrich Fischer Holly Cartner DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Bjern Engesland TREASURER Brigitte Dufour Krassimir Kanev Stein-Ivar Aarseerher Andrzej Rzeplinski FEDERATION FOR Wickenburggasse 1417, A-1080 Vienna, Austria; Tel +43-1-4088822; Fax 4088822-51 e-mail: [email protected] - internet: http://www.ihf-hr.org HUMAN RIGHTS Bank account: Bank Austria Creditanstalt 0221-00283/00, BLZ 12000

Problems of Religions Freedom and Tolerance in Selected r : OSCE States

Report to the OSCE Supplementary Meeting on Freedom ofReligion or Belief Vienna July 17-18, 2003

International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF)

The IHF has consultative status with jhe United Nations and the Council of Europe.

Albania - Austria - Azerbaijan·· Belarus - Bosnia-Herzegovina - Bulgaria - Canada- Croatia - Czech Republic- Germany Greece - Hungary - Italy - Kazakhstan - Kosovo - Kyrgyzstan - Latvia - Lithuania Macedonia - Moldova - ·Montenegro- Netherlands Norway - Poland - Romania Russia - Serbia Slovakia - Slo venia - Switzerland Ukraine - United Kingdom- United States- Uzbekistan'

The European Roma Rights Center - Human Rights Without The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) is a non-governmental organization that seeks to promote compliance with the human rights provisions of the Helsinki Final Act and its follow-up documents. In addition to supporting and providing liaison among 41 Helsinki committees and cooperating organizations, the IHF has direct links with human rights activists in countries where no Helsinki committees exist. It has consultative status with the United Nations and the Council ofEurope.

IHF· represents member and committees in Albania, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina,Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States and Uzbekistan. Other cooperating organizations include the European Roma Rights Centre (Budapest) and Human Rights without Frontiers (Brussels).

President: Ludmilla Alexeyeva Vice President: Ulrich Fischer Executive Director: Aaron Rhodes Deputy Executive Director/Legal.Counsel: Brigitte Dufour

This reports surveys recent developments regarding religious freedom and tolerance in ten selected OSCE countries, which are of particular concern to the IHF. The chapters are primarily based on information from Helsinki committees and IHF cooperating organizations. The report is not meant to be comprehensive and the length ofa chapter does not necessarily reflect the gravity ofour concerns.

The IHF hopes that the report will serve as a useful background document for the discussions to be held during the OSCE Supplementary Meeting on Freedom ofReligion or Beliefin Vienna on July 17-18,2003.

The report was prepared by Ann-Sofie Nyman, assisted by Stephanie Liechtenstein.

International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights Wickenburggasse 14/7, A-I080 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 4088822 Fax: (+43-1) 4088822-50 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.ihf-hr.org Bank account: Bank Austria Creditanstalt, 0221-00283/00 BLZ 12000

2 France

In France, separation of state and church is a leading principle, and by law the state may only interfere with 37 the affairs of religious groups to the extent it is necessary to guarantee public order. With reference to the need to ensure public security and respect for citizens' rights, the French government has actively engaged in efforts to control the activities of so-called "sects" during the last decade, which has .had negative implications for religious tolerance in the country. Upon taking office in the summer of 2002, the current government indicated that it assume a more moderate approach toward "sects" than its predecessors. Bearing this in mind, the IHF calls on the government to review all policies related to "sects" in order to ensure that they are constructive, proportionate and in full accordance with international human rights standards, take effective measures to counteract prejudice and discrimination against "non traditional" religious groups in the country.

In 1995, a- French commission set up to study the so-called "sect" issue published a report, which listed 172 religious groups deemed to be "harmful" and "dangerous" "sects." The publication of this study, which was rejected by experts because of its poor methodology, was ensued by a wave of bigoted and slanderous media reports targeting the listed groups as well as by increasing public suspicion and intolerance toward them. Although the list is not a legally binding document, local authorities as well as private actors have also used it to justify discriminatory actions against members of those groups included on it, e.g. when renting meeting facilities and when hiring or promoting employees. 38

In 1998, the French government established the Inter-Ministerial Mission for the Fight against Sects' (Mission interministerielle de lutte contre les sectes - MILS) to coordinate the monitoring of "sects," and appointed as its head Alain Vivien, chairman of an anti-sect movement. This body was criticized for contributing to fostering mistrust and fear against the groups listed as "sects." According to Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF), the mission "was in constant contact with anti-sect groups of which it was the official channel." The HRWF has further noted that "MILS played an advisory role at ministries in which it created a network of agents whose mission was to thwart the actions of sects. ,,39 MILS was also criticized for independently developing activities abroad, often seen to be in violation of religious freedom, and for misusing funds.

In a positive move, MILS dissolved after its president resigned following the June 2002 parliamentary elections. After publicly acknowledging the criticism targeted at MILS, the new government under Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin set up a new commission, the Interministerial Mission of Vigilance and Fight against Sectarian Deviances (Mission interministerielle de vigilance et de lutte contre les derives sectaires MIVILUDES), to replace MILS in late 2002. The name of the new body was supposed to reflect a more moderate and liberal attitude than the previous body had showed. According to the decree established MIVILUDES, the mission should respect civil liberties and carry out international activities related to its mandate only under supervision by the of Foreign Affaires. The decree also provided for a less 4o bureaucratic composition ofthe body than that ofMILS. '

37Human Rights WithoutFrontiers (HRWF), "From the MILS to the MIVILUDES: France's Sect Policy after the FaH of the Socialist Government -- research paper written by Dericquebourg, University Charles de Gaulle-- Lille 3," April 4, 2003. 38 See HRWF, "New Dramatic Developments in the Sect Issue," July 7,1998; and update to this press release ofMarch 4,1999. 39 HRWF,"From the MILS to the MIVILUDES," op.cit. - 40 Mission interministerielle de vigilance et de lutte contre les derives sectaires, Decree No. 2002-1392ofNovember28, 2002, at http://www.legifrance.gouv frlWAspad/UnTexteDeJorf?numjo=PRMX0200164D

22 Jean-Louis Langlais, senior officer of the Ministry of the Interior, was nominated president of MMLUDES. HRWF considers it significant that an official and not an "anti-cultist" was selected for position, but has voiced some misgivings regarding the fact that a number of previous members of MILS as well as people well-known for their negative attitudes toward minority religions are included in MIVILUDES. 4 1 In an interview given to HRWF in March 2003, the new president of MIVILUDES emphasized that the issue at stake is not to "sects" as such "deviances" these might have. However, he also admitted that it is difficult to define the concept of "deviances.?" At this stage it appears premature to comment on the work ofMIVILUDES and the course pursued by it as compared to that ofMILS.

Furthermore, the so-called About-Picard Sect Bill remains a matter of concern. This law, which is intended "to reinforce the prevention and epression of groups of a sect-like character" ("loi tendant renJorcer la prevention et la repression des mouvements sectaires portant atteint aux droits de I'homme et aux libertes fondamentales'Y, was passed by the Senate in May 2001 and approved by the National Assembly a few weeks later, in spite of strong opposition by French churches, by national and international NGOs and by legal experts.

The law introduced a new criminal offence of "fraudulent abuse of the state of ignorance or weakness of a minor, a person whose particular vulnerability on account of age, illness, infirmity, a physical or mental disability or pregnancy is apparent and known to the perpetrator, or a person in a state of psychological or physical subjection resulting from the use of severe or repeated pressures or of techniques such as impair that person's judgment, with the. aim of inducing that minor or person to 'commit an act or omission seriously harmful to his or her interests." The penalty amounts to three years' imprisonment and a heavy fine." This provision gives rise to concern because some of the expressions used in it, such as "psychological or physical subjection" and "pressures," are vague and ambiguous and may result in varying interpretations and possibly in arbitrary implementation restricting freedom ofreligion, expression and association.

Also, inder the law, a "sect," as well as any other legal entity, may be dissolved if is considered to meet two sets of criteria: a) it "pursues activities with the objective or effect of achieving, maintaining or exploiting the psychological or physical subjection of persons participating in those activities"; and it or its managers have been finally convicted of one or more of certain criminal offences. Dissolution proceedings may be initiated before. a high. court at the request of the public prosecutor or on an application by any interested party." This provision raises concern because of the vagueness of the expression "psychological or physical subjection" and, in addition, because the list of crimes that is covered seems unnecessarily broad. Among the listed crimes are unintentionally causing physical or mental harm to others, practicing pharmacy illegally and misleading advertising.

41 HRWF, "Jean Louis Langlais is new President the French Mission," December 12, 2002; HRWF,"From the MILS to the MIVILUDES," op.cit. . 42 HRWF, "InterministerialMission for Vigilance and Fight against Sectarian Deviances (MIVILUDES): Interview with Jean-Lois Langlais, president ofMIVILUDES," March 13,2003. 43 Chapter V, Section 6 bis of ACT No. 2001-504 of12 June 2001 to reinforce the prevention and suppression ofsects which infringe human rights and fundamental freedoms. English translation of the law included in Council ofEurope, Report on Freedom ofReligion and Religious Minorities in France, prepared by rapporteur Cevdet Akcali on behalfof the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, October 31, 2002 (9612/2002). 44 Chapter I, Section 1 ofACT No. 2001-504 of 12 June 2001 to reinforce the prevention and suppression of sects which infringe human rights and fundamental freedoms. See previous footnote for information on English translation of the law.

23 In November 2002, a rapporteur appoirited by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) to investigate whether the About-Picard Sect Bill meets European hwnan rights standards presented his findings.4S PACE subsequently adopted a resolution reminding the French government of the fact that the rights laid down by ECHR articles 9 to 11 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion; freedom of expression; and freedom of assembly and association) may be restricted only on certain conditions and concluded that "ultimately, should the case it will be for the European Court of Human Rights, and it to whether or not the French is compatible with the ECHR." The resolution also called on the French government to reconsider the law."

As regards the Jehovah's Witnesses, which is one of the largest groups that have been listed as "sects," a number ofimportant court decisions were issued in the latter halfof 2002.

• On December 18, 2002, the Court of Appeal of Versailles reversed a decision by a lower court and convicted Jean-Pierre Brard - a French deputy, Journal 15-25 ans COM and the director of this magazine for defamation. The court ordered that a communique drafted by it published in Journal 15-25 ans COM as well as in a national daily paper and that the defendants pay €4,000 to the Christian Federation of Jehovah's Witnesses. The verdict related to a September 2001 report on sects published by Journal 15-25 ans COM, where Brard accused the Jehovah's Witnesses of employing the same methods as international.criminal organizations. In March 2003, Brard appealed the verdict to the Court ofCassation, which is the highest court in the country."

• On November 6, 2002, the Auch High Court ordered the dissolution of an organization that had been explicitly created to prevent Jehovah's Witnesses from constructing a place of worship in Berdues, The court found that the organization's goal was to "hinder the free exercise ofreligion.?"

• On October 17, 2002, the administrative court of Orleans annulled a municipal decree issued by the mayor of Sorel-Moussel, which granted him the pre-emptive right to purchase a plot of land that the .local Jehovah's Witness community had intended to buy and use for the construction of a house of worship.49 .

4S Council of Europe, Report on Freedom ofReligion and Religious Minorities in France, prepared by rapporteur Cevdet Akcali on behalf ofthe Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, October 31,2002 (9612). 46 Council of Europe, "Freedom ofreligion and religious minorities in France," Resolution No. 1309/2002. 47 HRWF,"Jehovah's Witnesses v. Jean-Pierre Brard: A Defamation Case," March 20, 2003. 48 HRWF,"Judicial Dissolution of an anti-Jehovah's Witnesses Association," December 12,2002. 49 Ibid.

24 Belgiurn32

The relationship between the state and religions in Belgium is historically rooted in .the principle of recognition and non-recognition of religions. However, recognition criteria have never been enshrined in the Constitution, in decrees or in laws. Six religions - Catholicism, Protestantism, Anglicanism, Judaism, Islam and Orthodoxy - and secular humanism are currently recognized by the state. These communities enjoy advantages that are denied religious groups. In addition to treating different religious organizations unequally on the basis of their status, the government has unduly interfered with internal affairs of some religious communities and has failed to remedy discrimination suffered by members of religious groups officially listed as "harmful sects."

In a system clearly discriminatory toward non-recognized religious groups, the state provides funding only to recognized religions. State subsidies are provided by all taxpayers, including those who profess a non recognized religion or who do not adhere to any religion or belief system. Thus, members of non-recognized religious communities indirectly contribute to financing recognized communities. The issue of reforming the funding system has been raised at government level, but a concrete proposal is yet to be made.

Eight federal ministries as well as the ministries of the country's three linguistic communities, the ministries of its three regions (Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels), the administrations of its ten provinces and its 589 municipalities are involved in the fmancing of recognized religions and secular humanism. The federal state pays the salaries and costs for accommodation of community leaders and subsidizes the construction and renovation of places of worship. The federal state also decides how many clerics will be remunerated within in each recognized religious community, an arrangement that Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF) has criticized as an unacceptable interference 'with the internal affairs of these communities . The country's municipalities required to pay the running costs of the ecclesiastical administrations that recognized ' religions operate without having any right to control how the money spent actually is used. Islam remains dramatically under-fmanced in comparison with other recognized religions.

Non-recognized religious groups are also discriminated against in other ways than in terms of funding . For example, while chaplains of recognized religions and moral advisers of secular humanism officially have been granted the right to access prisons, detention centers for asylum-seekers, hospitals and military departments, non-recognized religious groups may not conduct visits in such

Moreover, the Belgian government has repeatedly interfered with the internal affairs of individual religious communities. At the request of the government, a Muslim representative body was created to function as the spokesperson of Islam in 1998. The country's Muslims were invited to elect a constituent assembly, from which would emerge an executive to serve as the official interlocutor with the state. Apparently with the intention of securing an executive that be "cooperative," the government meddled in the appointment of executive members. The government screened all candidates and did not allow any member to take up his or her position before he or she had been formally approved. This interference caused wide resentment within the Muslim community, and the relations between the representative body and the government have continually been tense.33 Tensions between the two parties reached a new climax at the end of 2002, when the Muslim assembly appointed a number of new members to its executive. As the government refused to

32 Unlessotherwise noted, based on Human RightsWithout Frontiers (HRWF), "Annual Report on Human Rights in Belgium" from the years 1999-2002. HRWF is an IHF cooperating organization. 33 HRWF,"Religious freedom, intolerance and discrimination in the European Union: Belgium 2002-2003," April 2003,p.6. endorse these members, a stalemate developed In this situation, two senators were tasked to mediate, and as a result of the mediation, the government and the Muslim executive agreed in April 2003 that half of the members of the executive be replaced. The new executive is due to remain in office until May 31, 2004, when new elections to the Muslim assembly are scheduled. According to HRWF, it can be expected that the government will initiate changes to the process for electing representatives to the Muslim assembly before that date."

Another problematic development relates to measures taken by the Belgian authorities to identify, warn the public against and monitor the activities of so-called "harmful sects." In March 1996, the parliament passed a law creating a parliamentary commission to examine the issue of "sects." A year later, this commission presented a report, attached to which was a list of 189 movements suspected of being "harmful sects." Although the introduction to the report stated that there was no intent to characterize any of the listed groups as "dangerous," the list quickly. became known in the media and to the public - precisely - asa list of "dangerous sects." Ever since the publication of the report, groups and members of groups included on the list have reportedly been subjected to harassment and discrimination both by authorities and by private actors. Victims include, inter alia, members of Adventist, Evangelical, Pentecostal, Jehovah's Witness, Sahaja Yoga, Spiritual Human Yoga, Raelian and Church of Scientology communities.

• Some Belgian municipalities have made it a requirement for civil service positions not to belong to any "harmful sect."

• Religious associations mentioned on the official list of groups suspected of being "harmful sects" are often denied the right to rent public meeting venues.

• In divorce cases, courts sometimes deny child custody to a parent on grounds that he or she is affiliated with a "harmful sect." In some cases, courts also grant a parent who is a member of a "sect" visitation rights only on condition that he or she does not "expose" his or her child/children to the teachings or lifestyleof the religiousgroup in question.

.• The tax department has denied the Japanese religious group Sukyo Mahikari the right to exemption from property tax for its place worship because it is included on the list of groups suspected of being "harmful sects." As of this writing, a court procedure initiated by Sukyo Mahikari in 1998 to appeal the tax department decision is still pending.

What is more, in 1999, two bodies were established to disseminate information about and coordinate the fight against "harmful sects" - the Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations (Sect Observatory) and the Inter-Ministerial Coordination Agency of Fight against Harmful Sectarian Organizations. The independence, objectivity and impartiality of both bodies are questionable. In particular, the recruiting method of the members of the Sect Observatory is problematic: half of the members are nominated by the Council of Ministers with approval by the House of Representatives, while the rest are directly appointed by the House of Representatives. In an indication of the political character of the recruiting method, the body is currently composed of representatives of political parties, the Catholic Church and various "anti-sect" movements. In addition, the Sect Observatory operates under and is funded by the Ministry of Justice. Neither the Sect Observatory nor the Inter-Ministerial Coordination Agency has taken any effective measures to address and put an end to the discrimination experienced by members of groups

34 HRWF, "Towards a newMuslim Executive recognized the State," April29, 2003.

17 depicted as "harmful sects," and the activities of the two bodies have increased rather than reduced prejudice against such. groups.

1 Summary record ofthe 1600th meeting: France. 11/11/97. CCPR/C/SR.1600. (Summary Record)

Convention Abbreviation: CCPR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

Sixtieth session

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 1600th MEETING

Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Tuesday, 22 July 1997, at 3 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. BHAGWATI

later: Mrs. MEDINA QUIROGA

Mrs.CHANET

CONTENTS

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT (continued)

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/385c2add1632f4a8cl2565a9004dc3111400d722307L. 13108/2003 · Mr. FAUGERE (France), replying to a question on "new religions" and the right offree association, stated that the law on associations no way authorized the administrative authorities to block the setting up ofan association ofany kind. That was also true for associations which supported activities ofa religious or purportedly religious nature. On the other hand, ifan association was causing a breach ofpublic order and ifits purpose was actually illicit, injurious to morality or caused danger to persons, proceedings for dissolution could be brought before a judicial magistrate. With regard to the Church ofScientology, the national association which supported that church's activities in France had been put into compulsory liquidation following a tax inspection. However, the authorities knew that it "had resumed activities in another form, In any event, the Church of Scientology was in no way entitled to claimthe status ofa church or religious congregation by virtue - inter alia ofthe Act of9 December 1905 on the separation ofchurch and State, and it enjoyed none ofthe benefits, notably tax benefits, attached to that status. Some ofits members in France had been prosecuted and convicted for endangering other persons and for practising medicine illegally. More generally, sects as propagators ofbeliefs were not subject to prosecution by the authorities, but the latter could make use ofall the legal means at their disposal in cases where a sect, or any ofits members, was guilty ofpractices that were illegal or contrary to public order, for instance abduction ofminors, unlawful confinement or acts ofviolence. In any event, it was clear that such procedures applied only to physical persons and not to organizations. In conclusion, he emphasized that the question ofsects was a matter ofconcern both to French public opinion and to the authorities, and that an observation unit had been set up following a parliamentary report. That unit, which had been in operation since 1996, would soon be publishing its first

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/385c2add1632f4a8cI2565a9004dc311/400d722307L. 13/08/2003 FROM • .

Go to: IGuardian Unlimited home

GuardianUnlimited Guardian Home UK ' Business Online World dispatch The wrap Weblog Talk Search Guardian World News guide Special reports Columnists Audio Help Quiz

France puts Scientology sect on trial

Court case questions church's recruitment methods

Jon Henley in Paris Thursday February 21, 2002 The Guardian this site France's bitter 10-year legal battle with the Church of Scientology will reach a critical stage today when a Paris court will for the firsttime hear charges against the organisation itself rather than individual members.

The case, which could well decide the movement's future in France, is the first since the adoption there last year of tough legislation that allows the dissolution of suspected .. sects found guilty of common offences.

Prosecutors will charge the Church's inner temple, the Spiritual

- •_ Association of the Church of Scientology in the Paris region, and its president, Marc Waiter, with abuse of civil liberties, misleading publicity and attempted fraud.

"It's a hugely important case, the first time the Church has been accused as a legal entity in its own right," said Olivier Morice, a for the National Union for the Defence of Families and Individuals, which is demanding that the organisation be outlawed. In this section The case stems from the complaints of three men, including two former Scientologists, who were sent brochures, booklets Suicide attacks in Israel test and invitations from the Church two or three times a week for road map to peace several years despite having repeatedly demanded to be removed from its mailing lists. Study of Bush's psyche touches a nerve A year-long inquiry headed by Judge Renaud van Ruymbeke Tolkien trilogy director rings found that the three men's names featured in half a dozen up record $20m to remake different Scientology databases maintained in France and King Kong Britain but also at the organisation's European HQ in Denmark and the International Association of Scientologists in Los Jackson names the price of Angeles. his success

Conflict reignites in is a clear-cut case of breach of civil liberties and data Monrovia despite Taytor's protection legislation," a spokesman at the public prosecutors departure office said yesterday. "The judge also argues that the organisation set up specifically to commit these offences." Five die in fierce gun battle as violence in Saudi capital The Church, which has dismissed the case as minor affair http://www.guardian.co.ukJintemational!story/0,3604,653557,0O.html 13/08/2003 ------I

Human shields face 12 about the complaint of a couple of individuals", will also be years' jail for visiting lrag accused of attempted fraud based on the "false allegations and untrue promlses"in its tracts. Iran's leader admits reforms have stalled Unlike the France to recognise Scientology as a CoLiple faked girl's cancer religion, arguing that it is a purely commercial operation out to make as much money as it can at the expense of often Diplomat ic row over poison vulnerable victims.

trial in Marseille three years ago, five Scientotogy officials Gibson film 'fuels hate of Jews' were found guilty of selling bogus "puriticatlon" treatments costing between £1,200 and £15,000 but consisting mainly of sessions in the sauna, jogging and vitamin pills. Microsoft targeted by 'webworm' Other leading French Scientologists have in the been offers ceasefire sentenced to jail terms - often suspended-for fraud and other financial offences, but this is the first time the Church itself and Artist aims to rebuild Bertin its recruitment methods have gone on trial. Wall Founded in .1954 by the late L Hubbard,an American Holy men plunge into Indian festival of Kumbh Mela science fiction writer, the Churchof Scientology claims more than 8m members worldwide, inclUding the Hollywood stars EU drive to fight global Tom Cruise and John Travolta. warming In France, the organisation says it has some 50,000 Shaggy dog story members, Scientology was first described as a sect in a 1996 parliamentary report, and stillfeatures on a list of 173 France faces nuclear DOwer under permanent govemment surveillance. crisis

DNA detective uncovers The movement was again strongly criticised this week violence of bronze age ice govemment's annual report on quasi-religious activity. It mummy's last hours accused the Scientologists of trying to "cash in on catastrophe", handing out thousands of parnphletsoffering Up to 17 killed in help and advice afterlast September's explosionat a chemical Afghanistan bus blast factory in Toulouse that 30 people, injured 2,500, and left 1,400 homeless Penthouse publisher files for bankruptcy Last year France became the first country to pass specific . legislation against sects, creating a new offence, the ."fraudulent abuse of a state of ignorance or weakness", which carries a prison sentence of up to three years and a maximum fine of £250,000.

The Church of Scientology has described it as "an attempt to impose state atheism".

Printable version I send it to a friend I Read it later I See saved stories I

IW kl ti

http://www.guardian.co.uk/intemational/story/0,3604,653557,00.html 13/08/2003 TOO BUSY WORKWQ TO fiND

Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Umited 2003

http://www.guardian.co.uklintemational!story/O,3604,653557,0O.html 13/08/2003 Center for Studies on New Religions

-The 2002 CESNUR International Conference Minority Religions, Social Change, and Freedom of Conscience

Salt Lake City and Provo (Utah), June 20-23, 2002

No Good Sects in France: Social and Political Implications of the Picard Law

by Stuart A. Wright (Lamar University, USA) A paper presented at CESNUR 2002, Salt Lake City and Provo. Preliminary version. Do not reproduce or quote without the consent.ofthe author

In the past several years, I have been following the political and legislative efforts of European countries to heighten social control of new or unconventional religious movements. These efforts spread throughout a number of Western Eastern European nations following the mass suicides/homicides offifty three members ofa New Age religious movement called the Order ofthe Solar Temple inSwitzerland and Canada in October 1994. Most died in fires set deliberately by sect leaders in a ritual described as a "transit" to another heavenly realm. Sixteen more members committed suicide on the winter solstice of 1995 in a wooded area near the Swiss border, and five others died in a ritual suicide outside Quebec around the spring equinox of 1997. These tragic events European governments to examine more closely the activities of fringe religious movements and explore ways to prevent future calamities. However, some of these endeavors have produced excessive infringements on religious belief and practice, and none more egregious than in France, where the campaign to root out so-called dangerous sects has approached a hunt. lam going to focus my remarks on the French case, not only because it is the most extreme, but because the new anti-sect campaign has taken place in a nation with a long tradition of respect for liberty and individual rights. As such, these new developments have raised a great deal of concern among international human rights organizations, scholars, religious leaders, and even government officials within France.

Background of Anti-Sect Campaign

Following the second wave of suicides by Solar Temple members in 1995, the French security division of the police (Renseignements generaux or R.G.) created a list of suspect religious organizations, without reference to any sociological definition or legal standard. The list was seized upon by the French National Assembly which adopted a resolution to create a commission ofinquiry "assigned to study the cult phenomenon." At the end of its work, which was carried out in strict secrecy, the commission, chaired by representative Alain Gest, published a report entitled "Sects in France." The commission defined a set of "danger criteria" that enabled it to classify religious organizations posing a threat (Hervieu-Leger, :249). It identified "172 groups and the Jehovah's Witnesses," and took credit for compiling the list, which was actually developed by the R.G.

http://www.cesnuLorg/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 Implications ofthe Picard Law In r rance - _

Lobbying by militant acnvists representing two anticult organizations, the . Association for the Defense of the Family and the Individual (ADF!) and the Center Against Mental Manipulation (CCMM or Center contre les manipulations mentales) led the government to put into place a significant arsenal ofrepressive measures against the blacklisted groups (Garay, 1999:7)

Betweenl996 and 1998, training and awareness programs for the police, magistrates and public school educators were conducted "so as to reinforce the control of the government agencies and the State against the sects" (Garay, 1999:8). In November 1997, the Minister of the Interior circulated a memorandumto the chiefs of alerting them to "the war against reprehensible actions of sectarian movements" (Garay, 1999:8) and made direct appeals to ADF! and CCMM forassistance. Responding to intense pressure by members of the Study Group on Sects within the National Assembly and the anticuIt organizations'ADFI and CCMM,'the Interministerial Mission to Combat Sects (MILS) was established by decree, signed by the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister. One of the primary objectives of the MILS, contained in Article 1, section 2, was "To incite public services...to take any appropriate measures to anticipate and counter the actions ofsects that undermine human dignity or that pose a threat to public order." Furthermore, in section 3, the Interministerial Mission was given a mandate "To share in informing and training civil servants on the methods to combat sects" and "To inform the public about the dangers of the sect phenomenon" (section 4). Article 6 of the decree effectively abolished the former Observatory on Sects, because it was judged to be "too soft" on new religions, particularly by hardline anticult leaders (Garay, 1999:10)and replaced it with the InterministerialMission. The newly appointed chair of the Interministerial Mission, .Alain Vivien, praised the MILS as a "new weapon" in the war against sects. The MILS was given operational power to coordinate activities among government agencies, thereby .sanctioning the administrative and judicial repression of sectarian movements (Garay,1'999:10).

The anti-sect campaign also generated new policies and practices, most notably the "fiscal weapon" ofrefusing to grant tax exemptions to sects such as is provided religious associations in the General Tax Code. In 1995, the Council ofState determined that one ofthe national associations ofJehovah's Witnesses did not at the time have an exclusively religious nature. The 'tax office used this administrative decision to refuse tax exemption status to the Jehovah's Witnesses after 1996, covering religious contributions made by over 200,000 followers, totaling 297 million francs (or about $47 million). Despite numerous decisions rendered by the European courts ruling that the activities of Jehovah'sWitnesses are purely religious and pose no threat to the social order, the French policy of taxing contributions has been maintained. During the debate on the creation ofthe MILS in 1998, one member ofparliament, Mr. Pontier, declared that "sectsexploit all the subtleties ofthe religious association system, set up by the law ofDecember 9, 1905" (Garay, 1999:16).

New French Law

On February 8, 2000, the MILS submitted a report to Prime Minister Lionel Jospin making legislative recommendations. Based on these recommendations, the French National Assembly, on May 30, passed the highly controversial new law, "Prevention and Repression of Sect Movements, also called the Picard law (named after the sponsor ofthe bill, Catherine Picard). The new legislation clearly violates the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. At its very core, the French law violates Articles 18 and 19 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which guarantee the "right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" and the "right to manifest (one's) religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." This includes the "right to freedom ofopinion and expression" and the "right to ...seek, receive and impart information and ideas" without undue interference by the state.

By way ofexplanation, the new law consists of eleven articles and an Explanatory Memorandum. [1] The Memorandum is exceptional in that it makes clear it is intended to be used as legal means to "paralyze sects" by providing public authorities and affected individuals with "preventative and

http://www.cesnur.orgI2002/slc/wright.htm 15108/2003 Implications ot the Law III punitive" powers against such groups.

Article One provides for the dissolution ofan organization ifits activities 1)"have the goal or effect to create or to exploit the state of mental or physical dependence ofpeople who are participating in its activities," and 2) infringe on "human rights and fundamental liberties," 3) in circumstances where the organization or its leaders (including de facto leaders) have been convicted on more than one occasion for certain offenses. The list of offenses is quite broad and does not require that the convictions involve acts committed on behalfofthe organization. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

* Causing a traffic accident resulting in bodily injury

Publishing an edited recording made with the spoken words or image ofa person without his or her consent

* Violating data protection laws by failing to destroy address files on ex- parishioners when they leave a religious group

* Breaching a professional secret

* Recommending vitamins or other natural health measures which could be characterized as illegal practice ofmedicine

* Invasion of privacy by procuring, recording or disclosing, without the author's consent, confidential remarks or remarks made in private, or by procuring or, recording or disclosing the image ofa person in a private place without his or consent

Article One also facilitates an expedited dissolution by requiring proceedings at a designated time and date in the court of first instance, imposing a fifteen-day limit for entering an appeal, and establishing procedures for an expedited appeal. Dissolution is imposed for a five year period. After a second instance, the sect may be legally banned.

Articles Two through Five create corporate criminal liability for organizations which meet conditions of dissolution contained in Article One (in instances where only individual liability previously existed). In it provides a separate means, other than dissolution, for a court to prohibit sect activities.

Article Six prohibits any person from participating in the reconstitution of a dissolved organization. It imposes criminal penalties ofup to three years imprisonment and a fine of 300,000 francs for the first offense, and up to five years imprisonment and a fine of500,000 francs for a second offense.

Article Seven addresses the renewed dissolution (or banning) ofa previously dissolved entity.

Article Eight prohibits sects from opening missions or recruiting new converts near schools, as well as hospitals or retirement homes. It imposes criminal penalties oftwo years imprisonment and a fine of 200,000 francs. An organization deemed to be a "sectarian group," then, may be denied building permits or licenses by the cities in violation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Article Nine prohibits "promotion of propaganda intended for young people" by an organization covered by Article One.

Articles Ten and Eleven create a new crime of"mental manipulation" which is punishable by a fine of500,000 francs and five years imprisonment. The ofmental manipulation is predicated on http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 Implications ot the Picaro Law III nrance • state of psychological or physical subjection resulting from heavy or repeated pressure on a vulnerable person, or use of techniques likely to alter his judgement, (or) to induce in him behavior prejudicial to his interests." The law defines as "vulnerable," minorities, the elderly, anyone suffering from a long-termor debilitating illness, or persons considered after medical examination to be "in a state of physical or psychological subjection." The basis for a medical determination is not made clearin the new law. This is perhaps the most troubling aspect of the About-Picard and. indicates the degree to which the legislative body failed to consider carefully the implications for civil liberties and human rights.

Tragically, this new legislation opens the door to possible abuses of psychiatry or clinical psychology which can become captive to political purposes, such as was found in the former Soviet Union where symptomology and diagnoses were devised as social weapons to suppress deviance (Bloch and Reddaway, 1977). Soviet psychiatrists, inthe service of the State, treated dissidents by committing them to asylums or psychiatric colonies, justifying involuntary internment on the basis of such convenient diagnoses as "manic reformism," "psychopathic negativism," "counterrevolutionary delusions," and "schizophrenia." Rejecting the moral and political principals of Communism was evaluated as a characteristic symptom of schizophrenia because dissidents revealed "a poor adaptation to the social environment" (Bloch and Reddaway, 1977:253)..Article 142 of the former Soviet Criminal Code decreed the following acts as punishable by incarceration for one year in a labor camp: 1) distribution of materials calling for the nonobservance of legislation on religious cults, 2) arousing religious superstition among the population, 3) organization of religious meetings which disrupt the social order, and 4) teaching religion to minors (B10ch and Reddaway, 1944:159). These criminalized acts have a resounding similarity to some of the provisions of the new French law.

Another provision in the law allows for private associations to initiate criminal actions as civil plaintiffs. against sects on behalfof affected persons, even if the "victims" have no complaint. The law specifically refers to "anticult associations recognized as useful by the government and having been active for at least five years." This provision to be created for two associations, CCMM and ADFI, to give official imprimatur to their battle against sects. According to Massimo Introvigne (2001), this creates "a legal fiction where the alleged victim is represented by ADFI or CCMM and cannot question the representation and the legal decisions made in his or her own name." Moreover, damages collected from successful litigation benefit the associations, and not the so-called victim.

Socialand Political Implications of Picard Law

The controversial new legislation appears to have the widespread support in France. According to a recent French poll, 73 percent ofrespondents believe cults are a danger to democracy and 86 percent would "ban" organizations such as Scientology ("Cult crackdown called extreme," Guardian, June 12, 2001). After the Interministerial report was issued, French scholar Daniele Hervieu-Leger observed that "the entire French press commented on the report" and that "the commentaries applauded the idea ...ofsoon banning groups considered dangerous" (2001 :249). She went on to say, "Whatever their political bent, left or right, the newspapers hailed the determination of the (Interministerial) Mission, created in 1998, to help the government effectively. combat threats to individual liberties and public safety posed by the sects in France. In fact, this concern considerably predates the creation of the mission and has garnered broad public support" (p.249). The roots of such widespread acrimony toward unconventional religions is in need of explanation. There appear to be a number of factors contributing to this public response, converging to produce a particularly intense societal reaction. I want to examine each ofthese briefly.

French Exceptionalism The evolution of the Picard law may be impossible to understand without taking into account the cultural and historical context of Church-State relations and French secularism (la laicite a la

http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 Implications ofthe Picard Law m France wrigmj - francaise). Hervieu-Leger (2001:252) points out that throughout its history, the French have been tom between the democratic objective of guaranteeing religious freedom and the 19th century rationalist ideal of emancipating minds "from the influence of beliefs deemed to be in stark contradiction to reason and autonomy." Historically, the French struggle for democracy must be seen as one which was confronted with the unwanted intrusion of the powerful Catholic Church into secular affairs. French anticlericalism led to the utopian ideal that the State could replace the Church as a civil religion with its own hierarchy, symbols and rites, and forging unity based on reason (LeBlanc, 2001). Harboring a deep suspicion toward the irrational aspects of religion, the French reached a 'compromise in 1905 that- led to the legal separation of church and state. Under this compromise, religious belief was protected but subordinated to the "management of religion within the limits of the Republic." The principal aim was to privatize suspect religious beliefs and conscience, removing sectarian manifestations from the public sphere, while making collective expressions subject to approval by the state. According to Hervieu-Leger, the laicite perspective, in effect, created an "implicit regime ofrecognized religions" (p.252).

The French believe that religion in its primitive and uncontrolled form threatens social unity and cohesion, and leads to psychological dependence and "intellectual obscurantism," a term explicitly used by Alain Vivienrecently to call up these resonant sentiments from the past. Minorityreligions have no claim to legitimacy unless they can adapt to the values of the Republic. The recent proliferation of new religions poses a crisis for French society. New movements demanding the benefits of religious protection and freedom do not conform to the implicit system of taken-for granted commitments to the laicite model. Thus, a deep-rooted distrust that religious alienation poses a threat to independent thought reason has resurfaced.

Transnational Anti-cult Movement

A second factor is the mobilization ofa transnational network ofanti-cult movement activists. Just as globalization has expanded economic opportunities and relations across national borders, this new world order has also given rise to new international political, social and religious movements. Not surprisingly, these movements have spawned countermovements. ACM activists in North America, such as Steven Kent and Steve Hassan, have worked closely with members ofAFDI and CCMM in France, providing ideological frameworks, defining strategies, identifying resources, serving as consultants or experts in court cases and cultivating contacts inthe media and in government. These efforts are analogous to missionary activities (or "counter-missionary" activities) to repel the growth ofNRMs throughout Europe. A number ofstudies have documented the transcontinental ties present in episodes of domestic moral panic involving NRMs in places as distant as Europe, Australia and South America. And in all ofthese cases, North American ACM activists have played a crucial role.

Within the European Union, the most salient example of the ACM network is the European Federation of Centers of Research and Information on Sectarianism (FECRIS). It is composed of a network of anti-sect groups that have adopted an extremist and highly controversial approach towards the much-debated issue of religious, esoteric and spiritual groups. FECRIS has issued demands for "the creation ofa European legal arena with regard to sectarian issues," and asserted the importance of "resisting pressure to place cultic behavior on the safe ground ofreligion and belief." FECRIS has assailed world and European organizations critical ofdiscrimination aimed at minority religions, such as the European Commission, the Euopean Parliament, the Council ofEurope and the OSCE, as being "infiltrated by cults." In November of 2000, the Chinese government invited representatives from CCMM and FECRIS to an international symposium on "destructive cults," with the intent giving legitimation to the Chinese campaign against the Falun Gong. CCMM later reported that they were warmly received. And CCMM members also noted that France was being lauded as model to be emulated because of "the degree and coherence of the measures taken to respond to the sectarian threat" (Dasi, 2001:74).

http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 Implications ofthe Picard Law ID t-rance wngntj -

Tragically, transnational crusades have engendered similar patterns wherever they have established organizational operations--harassment by media, police investigations and surveillance, child abuse allegations, pre-dawn government raids, and repressive new laws aimed at new religions. By framing the issue ofgrowing religious pluralism as a "cult threat," or a "threat to the public order," the ACM missionaries have effectively appealed to populist sentiments and fears--nativism, xenophobia and especially important to the French case, nationalism. In fact, in this last instance, the appeal to nationalism has been a distinct feature ofFrench anticultism and it has been a very successful tactic. This brings me to the third factor.

Anti-Americanism

Since many ofthese religious groups have D.S. roots, it appears that the anti-sect campaign has been driven; in part, by anti-American sentiment in France. Or perhaps just umbrage over what is perceived as American hubris and imperialism. Since 1998, the D.S. State Department has been submitting to Congress annual reports on the conditions of religious freedom around the world, in compliance with the International Religious Freedom Act (1998). The reports have condemned French lawmakers and activists who have campaigned against unconventional religions, attempting to legitimize legal sanctions restricting their activities. The 1999 D.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom report, for example, criticized French authorities for "contributing to an atmosphere of intolerance and bias against minority religions." French authorities shot back that the D.S., which is the only advanced industrial nation to have the death penalty, was in no position to criticize other nations for human rights violations. More specifically, some French journalists, in concert with anticult organizations, have "promoted the notion that sects are a dangerous American import" (Goodenough, 2001). One respected newspaper, Le Monde, called the phenomenon ofnew sects, an "American Trojan Horse" in Europe. The business-oriented newspaper, Le Figaro, depicted the D.S. as "paradise for cults that protects religious practice with excess." Efforts by U.S. State Department officials to dissuade the French government from their anti-sect campaign have been rebuffed. According to one news report, the new law is tied to "an outlook among some French lawmakers and European officials who resent intrusion by American religious groups" (Witham, 2001). This view has been fomented by French anti-cultists. Alain Vivien, in his first MILS annual report, referred to the United States as "sanctuary" for dangerous sects. He argued that the State Department's concerns were a product of intense lobbying by cult operatives. And he depicted the actions of the Church ofScientology as "clandestine operations launched against France from a foreign nation" (LeBlanc, 2001). Perhaps the most peculiar expression of anti-Americanism was a television documentary produced by journalist Bruno Fouchereau which suggested that some new religious movements were "front groups" for international espionage. In the documentary, broadcast on France 3 television in May 2000, the mayor ofa small village, Saint-Julien-du-Verdon, himselfa retired military officer, reported that he had seen "cable plugs and antennas in statues belonging to a local religious movement know as Mandoram. Could these be disguised transmission devices of some foreign country, spying on the acoustic detection laboratory for submarine warfare down below the mountain by Lake Castillon?" (LeBlanc, 2001)

Conclusion

The social and political implications are far-reaching. hearings before the House International Affairs Subcommittee on Operations and Human Rights in July 2000, subcommittee members heard testimony about the potential abuse of human rights posed by the new French law. Subcommittee chairwoman, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla), observed that "China's Communist leaders (were) studying the French precedent for possible use against the Falun Gong movement" (Davidson, 2001). Assistant Secretary of State Lorne Cramer said the State Department was "very concerned that the French model of anti-cult legislation will be adopted and misused by countries that possess neither the French rule of law nor France's history of protecting human rights" (Davidson, 2001). Some European nations with respectable records of human rights protections have already considered adopting new social controls over sects. Belgium, for example, has a blacklist of 189 religious sects

http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 that may become targets of repression (Haynes, 2001). In June of this 2001, the Interministerial Mission hosted a conference in Paris on the "illegal activities oforganizations of sect-like character in Europe" ("Meeting Against Illegal Activities of Sects in Europe Held in Paris," COMTEX, June 18, 2001). Representatives from 22 European governments, mainly from public institutions charged with monitoring the activities of sects, attended the meeting, according to a spokesperson from MILS. Thus, concerns about other countries adopting similar legislation may be well founded.

However, this has to be balanced against reactions from the international community, which have been growing. Opposition to the taw has been expressed by French Catholic and Protestant Churches, the Jewish and Islamic communities, fifty representatives of the Council of Europe, international human rights organizations, scholars, and leading French jurists. In August of 2000, three international religious organizations-World Evangelical Fellowship, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, and Advocates International-told a United Nations panel in Geneva that the proposed French law regulating sects was a "threat to religious liberty" ("Religious Groups Critize French Sect Proposal," Religion News Service, August 10, 2001). In its 2001 report on worldwide religious freedom, "Aid to the Church in Need," one international Catholic charity placed France on its list of countries with laws. Representative Christopher Smith (R-NJ), who is also eo-chair of the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHFHR), has sharply criticized the French legislation calling the law a "harbinger ofa wave ofintolerance" ("Congressman Blasts French Sect Law," Associated Press, July 10, 2001). A report issued last year by the IHFHR (2000:13) on religious intolerance, called the proposed French law "discriminatory," noting that "abuses should be dealt with under the Criminal Code and other legislation and not through adopting a separate law targeted at religious minority groups." As a result of a petition by 40 religious and human rights organizations, the Council of Europe has appointed a rapporteur who is investigating the law and cases ofreligious discrimination in France. The U.S. State Department's 2001 Report on Religious Freedom placed France on list ofworst violators. The Church ofScientology, one ofthe chieftargets ofthe anti-sect campaign, has filed a legal action to the European Court ofHuman Rights to have it declared in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. As recently as last September, the Committee ofMinisters ofthe Council ofEurope responding to a recommendation (1412) by the Parliamentary Assembly ofthe Council ofEurope, entitled "Illegal Activities ofSects," wrote:

Governments are under an obligation, in their dealings with such groups, to remain in conformity not only with Article 9 but with all the provisions ofthe European Convention on Human Rights and other relevant instruments protecting the dignity inherent to all human beings and their equal and inalienable rights. This entails, inter alia, a duty to respect the principles of religious freedom and non-discrimination.

The Committee went on to say that states should use existing procedures ofcriminal and civil law to address problems posed by sects, and it affirmed religious pluralism as an inherent feature of democratic societies.

As this conflict plays out in the next few years, human rights organizations, religious leaders, government officials, scholars of religion, minority religions and anti-cult interest groups will be vying for "ownership" ofthe so-called sect problem and seeking to influence social policy. The role ofscholars conducting empirical research will be critical in framing and shaping public perception of the issues, an increasingly pluralistic domain in the new world order as the venues of information and persuasion expand. Herein is the battlefield where the contest of ideas will take place and the politics ofcommunication will likely shape the outcome.

http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15108/2003 Implications ot the Picarc Law ill r rance vv_ - - -

Notes

1. [back] I have relied on annotated translation and summary of the new law provided on the CESNUR website at http://www.cesnur.orgI2001/fr_law.en.htm. .

References

Bloch, Sidney and Peter Reddaway. 1977. Psychiatric Terror: How Soviet Psychiatry is Used to Suppress Dissent. New York: Basic Books.

Dasi, Merudvi. 2001. "Religious Freedom and NRMs in Europe." ISKCON Communications Journal 8 (2):65-77.

Davidson, Lee. 2001. "Europe abetting anti-religion drive?" Deseret News, July 13.

Garay, Alain. 1999. "French Policy Against Sects." Unpublished paper (on file with author).

Goodenough, Patrick. 2001. "French Anti-Sect Law: Christian Lawyers Prepare for Action." CNS News, June 4.

Haynes, Charles. 2001. "France's anti-cult law undermines religious-liberty Freedom Forum, July 22.

Hervieu-Leger, Daniele. 2001. "Frances Obsession with the Sectarian Threat." Nova Religio 4 (2):249-57.

International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights. 2001. Religious Intolerance in Selected OSCE Countries in 2000. The 26 June.

Introvigne, Massimo. 2001. "Seven Things You Can Do Immediately About the French Law: A Manifesto." Online at http://www.cesnur.org/200I/fr_may30_mi.htm. -

LeBlanc, Benjamin-Hugo. 2001. "No Bad Sects in France." Religion in the News 4 (3):1-7, found on internet, http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVoI4N03/French%20sects.htm.

Witham, Larry. 2001. "French sect lists' criticized in House hearing." Washington Times, July 12.

Cyberproocedings Index

[Home Page] [Cos'e iI CESNURI [Biblioteca del CESNUR)ITesti e documenti] [Libri) [Convegni] @

(Home Page} [About CESNURj Library] Documentsl Hsook [Conferences) http://www.cesnur.org/2002/slc/wright.htm 15/08/2003 SWitzerland

International Religious Freedom Report 2002 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right practice.

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report, and government policy continued to contribute to the generally free practice ofreligion.

The generally amicable relationship among religions in society contributed to religious freedom.

The U.S.Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country has a total area of 15,941 square miles, and its population is an estimated 7.21 million.

Experts estimate that between 300 to 800 denominations and groups are established throughout,the country. Approximately 95 percent of the population traditionally has been split evenly between Protestant churches and the Catholic Church. Since the 1980's, there has been a trend of persons, primarily Protestants, formally renouncing their church membership. According to the Federal Government's Office of Statistics, membership in religious denominations is as follows: approximately 44.1 percent Roman Catholic, 36.6 percent Protestant, 4.5 percent Muslim, 1.2 percent Orthodox, 1.9 percent other religions, and 11.7 percent no religion. There are an estimated 58,500 persons belonging to other Christian groups; 29,175 belonging to new religious movements; 17,577 Jews; and 11,748 Old catholics.

Islamic organizations believe that the Muslim population has grown to 350,000 persons, due to the influx of Yugoslav refugees in the several years. Muslims, who are the country's largest non-Christian minority, practice their religion throughout the country. Although only 2 mosques exist-in Zurich and Geneva-there are approximately 120 Islamic centers throughout the country.

Groups such as Young Life, Youth for Christ. the Church of Scientology, Youth With a Mission, the Salvation Army, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), Seventh-Day Adventists, and the Islamic Call are active in the country.

Section 11. Status of Religious Freedom

Legal/PolicyFramework

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice. The Government at all levels strives to protect this right in full and does not tolerate its abuse, either by governmental or private actors.

The Constitution grants freedom of creed and conscience and the Federal Criminal Code prohibits any form of debasement or discrimination of any religion or of any religious adherents.

There is no official state church. However. all of the cantons financially support at least one of the three traditional denominations-Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, or Protestant-with funds collected through taxation. Each of the 26 states (cantons) has its own regulations regarding the relationship between church and state. In all an individual may choose not to contribute to church taxes. However, in some cantons private companies are unable to avoid payment of the church tax. A religious organization

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13984pf.htm 19/08/2003 must register with the Govemmentin order to receivetax-exempt status. There have been no reportsof a nontraditional religiousgroup applyingfor the "churchtaxation" status that the traditional three denominations enjoy. Total churchtaxation revenues were $850 million (1.3 billion Swissfrancs) in 1997.

Groupsof foreign origin are free to proselytize. Foreignmissionariesmust obtain a "religious visa to work in the country. Requirements includeproofthat the foreigner would not displace a citizen from doing the job, that the foreigner would be supported financially by the host organization, and that the countryof origin of religiousworkers also grantsvisas to Swiss religious workers. Youth"intems" may qualifyfor special visas as well.

Religion is taught in public schools. The doctrinepresenteddepends on which religion predominates in the parlicularstate. However,those of differentfaiths are free to attend classes for their own creedsduring the classperiod. Atheists are not required to attendthe classes. Parents also may send children to privateschools or teach their children at home.

·In response to the issue of Holocaustera assets,the Governmentand private sectorinitiateda series of measures designed to shed light on the past, provideassistanceto Holocaustvictims, and addressclaims to dormantaccountsin Swiss banks.These measures included:The Independent Commission of Experts underProfessorJean-Francois Bergier, which concludedon March 20, 2002, a 600 page report on the country'swartime history and its role as a financialcenter; the IndependentCommittee of Eminent Personsunder Paul Volcker, charged with resolving the issue of dormant World War 11 era accountsin Swissbanks; the Swiss Special Fundfor NeedyHolocaustVictims worth $180 million (288 million Swiss francs); and the Swiss Special Fundfor NeedyHolocaustVictims worth $180 million(2881llillion Swiss francs), financed by both the privatesectorand the Swiss National Bank, whichwas paid to 309,000 personsin 60 countries.

The debate over the country'sWorld War 11 record contributedto the problemof anti-Semitism (see SectionIll). The Federal Counciltook actionto addressthe problemof anti-Semitism. The Federal Departmentof the Interiorhas set up a Federal Servicefor the Combatingof Racism to coordinate anti racism activitiesof the FederalAdministration with cantonal and communal authorities. This Federal Service,which began operatingat the beginning of 2002, has a budget of 15 millionSwiss francs to use over a period.Ofthis money,500,000 Swissfrancs per year was reserved for the establishmentof new local consultation centerswhere victimsof racialor religious discrimination may seek assistance. Approximately 130 of these consultation centersor contact points already exist in the country. In addition, the FederalServicefor the Combating of Racism sponsorsand manages a varietyof projectsto combat racism, includingsome projectsspecifically addressing the problem of anti-Semitism.

In 1999the Federal Council (Cabinet) announced the creation of a Center for Tolerancein Bem. Planning for the center under chairmanship of a former parliamentarian is continuing,and financing is expected to comefrom the public and privatesectors. The Center,which plans to producecurriculamaterialto addressthe roots of racism, provides exhibitsdesignedto teach historical lessons,offer research opportunities, and host international symposia, held its first symposium, "Bern-Discussion for Tolerance"on November11, 2001 in a hotel in Bem. Meanwhilethe search for a permanentlocationfor the plannedcenter continues.

The Governmentdoes not initiateinterfaith activities.

Of the country's 16 largest politicalparties, only 3-the EvangelicalPeople's Party,the Christian Democratic Party, and the Christian SocialParty-subscribe to a religious philosophy. There have been no reportsof individualsbeing excluded from a politicalparty because of their religious beliefs. Some groups haveorganizedtheir own parties,such as the Transcendental Meditation Maharishi'sParty of Nature and the Argentinean Guru's Humanistic Party. However, none of these have gained enoughof a following to win political representation.

Restrictions on Religious Freedom

On December19. 2001, the Vaud cantonal court rejected a claim by the Churchof Scientologythat Lausanne authoritieshad discriminated againstthem and prevented them from renting a restaurantand launching an advertising campaign. The court said that the Church of Scientology could not be considered as a "real church" becauseit "did not believein God," and because its serviceshad no religious connection. As a result,the court said that religiousdiscriminationcould not apply.The Church did not appeal the court decision.

Dueto increasingconcernover certaingroups,in 1997the Governmenthad asked an advisory commission to examinethe Churchof Scientology. The commission's 1998 reportconcludedthat there was no basis for special monitoring of the Church,since it did not representany direct or immediatethreat to the securityof the However, the report stated that the Church had characteristics of a totalitarian organization and had its own intelligence network. The commission also wamed of the

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/ir£!2002/13984pf.htm 19/08/2003 _ _ ..... _ _.

significant financial burden imposed on Church of Scientology members and recommended reexamining the issue at a later date. In December 2000, the Federal Department of Police published a follow-up which concluded that the activities of such groups, including Scientology, had not altered significantly since the first report and that their special monitoring therefore was not justified. The Government no longer specially monitors the Church of Scientology.

In 1999 the Church of Scientology failed in the country's highest court to overturn a municipal law in Basel that barred persons from being approached on the street by those using "deceptive or dishonest methods." The Court ruled that the law, prompted by efforts to curb Scientology, involved an intervention in religious freedom but did not infringe on it.

city of Buchs, St. Gallen, also has'passed a law modeled on the Basellaw. However, it is still legal to proselytize in nonintrusive ways, such as through public speaking on the street or by going door-to-door in neighborhoods .

. In 1995 in Zurich, Scientologists appealed a city decision that prohibited them from distributing flyers on public property. In 1999 a higher court decided that the Scientologists' activities were commercial and not religious, and that the city should grant them and other commercial enterprises such as fast food restaurants more freedom to distribute flyers on a permit basis. Fearing a heavy administrative and enforcement workload, the city appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rejected the appeal in 2000, reinforcing the decision by the previous court that the Scientologists' activities were commercial in nature. The Supreme Court decision is expected to establish a nationwide legal guideline on the issue.

In Winterthur City, the authorities require Scientologists to apply for an annual permit tosell their books on public streets. The permit limits their activities to certain areas and certain days. This practice has been in effect since 1995 when a district court upheld fines issued to Scientologists by the city for accosting passersby to invite them onto their premises to sell them books and conduct personality tests. The court that the Scientologists' activities primarily were commercial, rather than religious, which required them to get an annual permit for the book sale on public property and prohibited them from distributing flyers or other advertising material. The Supreme Court's decision in that case is expected to be the national legal guideline on the issue.

In January 2002, the City of Zurich decided to establish a Muslim cemetery, ending a decade-long struggle of local Muslim organizations for a place to bury their members. The cemetery is expected to be ready by the end of 2002, adjacent to an existing public cemetery in a Zurich suburb. It offers space for a few hundred graves and meets Muslim religious requirements. Muslim congregations also may use the existing infrastructure of the cemetery to perform rituals. Muslim cemeteries already exist in Geneva, Bern, and Basel.

In February 2002, the European Court of Human Rights upheld the Canton of Geneva's legal prohibition of a Muslim primary school teacher from wearing a headscarf in the classroom. The Court ruled that the Geneva regulations do not violate the articles on religious freedom and nondiscrimination of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court found that the legal provisions did not discriminate against the religious convictions of the complainant, but were meant to protect the rights of other subjects as well as the public order.

On March 13, 2002, the Government backed down on its proposal to lift the ban orr the ritual slaughter of animals after its draft bill met with strong opposition during public consultation. Ritual slaughter (the bleeding to death of animals that have not stunned first) has been banned in the country since 1893. The Government proposed to lift the ban because it considered it to be an infringement on the freedom of religious minorities; however, the proposal provoked a wave of opposition from animal rights and consumer groups, veterinary surgeons, and farmers arguing that the practice inflicted undue suffering on animals. The Government took its decision to maintain the ban in the interest of religious peace after consulting with Jewish organizations. The Government announced that new legislation would be drafted to allow explicitly the import of kosher and haJal meat, which already generally is readily available at comparable prices.

There were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees.

ForcedReligiousConversion

There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, of the refusal to allow such citizens to be returned to the United States.

Section Ill. Societal Attitudes

http://www.state.goY/gldrl/rls/irf/2002/13984pf.htm 19/08/2003 ...

The generally amicable relationship among religions in society contributed to religious freedom.

According to the 2001 Swiss National Security Report, as of December 2001, there had been 183 cases brought to court under the 1995 antiracism law, with 83 convictions. Of those, 43 were for.racist oral or written slurs, 19 persons for anti-Semitism, 17 for revisionism, and 4 for other reasons.

In June 2001, a visiting Israeli Orthodox rabbi was shot and killed in Zurich. Although the circumstances of the event stimulated speculation that it may have been a hate crime, police were unable to uncover any evidence about the perpetrator or his motives.

On May 22,2002, a Vevey district eourt sentenced three revisionists-Gaston-Armand Amaudruz, Philippe Greorges Brennenstuhl and Rene-Louis Berclaz-to prison terms of 3 and, in Berclaz's case, 8 months for racial discrimination. men were found guilty of writing and distributing two books that their revisionist and anti-Semitic views to the general public. Only Brennenstuhl was present at the court ruling. He declined to answer the court's questions and built his case on the constitutional right to free speech.

In 1998 the Federal Commission Against Racism released a report on anti-Semitism expressing concem that the controversy over the country's role during World War 11 had to some extent contributed to increased expressions of latent anti-Semitism. At the same time, the Commission described the emergence of strong public opposition. to anti-Semitism and credited the Federal Council with taking a "decisive stand" against anti-Semitism. The Commission also proposed various public and private measures to combat anti-Semitism and encourage greater tolerance and understanding.

In response the Federal Council committed itself to intensify efforts to combat anti-Semitic sentiment and racism. The Federal Council welcomed the publicly funded 1999 Bergier Commission report that disclosed the country's World War 11 record on turning away certain refugees fleeing from Nazi oppression, including Jewish applicants. The Federal Council described the publication of the Bergier Report as an occasion for reflection and discussion of the country's World War 11 history. The Federal Council took new action to address the problem of anti-Semitism (see Section 11).

In March 2000, a Geneva research group released a survey in cooperation with the American Jewish Committee in New York, stating that anti-Semitic views are held by 16 percent of citizens. Other prominent survey firms, as well as some JewiSh leaders. disputed the accuracy of the Geneva firm's survey, stating that the survey overestimated the prevalence of anti-Semitic views. According to the survey, 33 percent of Swiss People's Party (SVP) supporters voiced anti-Semitic views. However, the survey found that 92 percent of all Swiss youth rejected anti-Semitic notions. The reflected some inconsistencies. For example, during the recent period of controversy over the country's World War 11 record, public opinion in support of the country's antiracism laws actually strengthened.

There have been no reports of difficulties in Muslims buying or renting space to worship. Although occasional complaints arise, such as a Muslim employee not being given time to pray during the workday, attitudes generally are tolerant toward Muslims.

Many nongovemmental organizations coordinate interfaith events throughout the country.

Section IV. U.S. Government

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights. The U.S. Embassy discusses religious freedom issues with both Govemment officials and representatives of the various faiths.

Released on October 7. 2002

International Religious Freedom Report Home Page

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/ir£.2002/13984pf.htm 19/08/2003 ------

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice; however, the Government took action against groups that it considers "harmful sects."

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report, and government policy continued to contribute to the generally free practice of religion.

There are generally amicable relations among different religious groups in society; however, several religious groups complain of discrimination, particularly groups that have not been accorded official "recognized" status by the Government, and those associated primarily with immigrant communities.

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country has a total area 0112;566 square miles and its population is approximately 10.3

The population is predominantly Roman Catholic. Approximately 75 percent of the population nominally belongs to the Catholic Church. The Muslim population numbers approximately 350,000, approximately 90 percent ofwhom are Sunni. Protestants number between 90,000 and 100,000. The Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have approximately 100,000 adherents. The Jewish population is estimated at 40,000, and the Anglican Church has approximately 21,000 members. The largest nonrecognized religions are Jehovah's Witnesses, with approximately 27,000 baptized members, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), with approximately 3,000 members. According to the Government, nonconfessional philosophical organizations (or "Iaics") have 350,000 members; however, the laics claim 1.5 million members. Unofficial estimates indicate that approximately 10 percent of the population does not identify with any religion. <

According to a 1999 survey by an independent academic group, only 11.2 percent of the population attend weekly religious services. However, religion still does play a role in major life events-65 percent of the children born in the country are baptized; 49.2 percent of couples opt for a religious marriage; and 76.6 percent of funerals include religious services.

Section 11. Status of Religious Freedom

Legal/Policy Framework

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice.

The Government accords "recognized" status to Roman Catholicism, Protestantism (including evangelicals), Judaism, Anglicanism, Islam, and Orthodox Christianity (Greek and Russian). These religions receive subsidies from government revenues. The Government also supports the freedom to participate in laic organizations. These secular humanist groups serve as a seventh recognized "religion" and their organizing body, the Central Council of Non-Religious Philosophical Communities of Belgium, receives funds and benefits similar to those of the six other recognized religions.

By law each recognized religion has the right to provide teachers at government expense for religious instruction in schools. The Government also pays the salaries, retirement, and lodging costs of ministers and subsidizes the construction and renovation of church buildings for recognized religions. The http://www.state.gov!g!drl/rls/irf/2002/13924pf.htm 19/08/2003 ------

ecclesiastical administrations of recognized religions have legal rights and obligations, and the municipality in which they are located mustpay any debts that they incur. Some subsidies are the responsibility of the federal govemment while the regional ·and municipal governments pay others. According to an independent academic review, government at all levels spent $523 million (23 billion Belgian francs) on subsidies for recognized religions in 2000. Of that amount, 79.2 percent went to the Catholic Church, 13 percent to secular humanist groups, 3.5 to Muslims, 3.2 percent to Protestants, 0.6 percent Jews. 0.4 percent to Christians, and 0.1 percent to Anglicans. During 2001, the Muslim Executive Council applied for the first time for SUbsidies, and the Govemment announced that in 2002 it would recognize 75 mosques and pay salaries to imams assigned to these mosques. The Council , which is recognized by the Govemment, received funding; however, specific mosques and religious schools, which have not yet been proposed by the Council and thus are not recognized by the Govemment, received no funding. Taxpayers who Qbject to contributing to these subsidies may initiate legal proceedings to challenge their contributions.

The Govemment applies the following five criteria in deciding whether or not to grant recognition to a religious group: 1) the religion must have a structure or hierarchy; 2) the group must have a sufficient number of members ; 3) the religion must have existed in the for a long period of time; 4) it must offer a social value to the public; and 5) the religion must abide by the laws of the State and respect public order. The five criteria are not listed in decrees or laws. The law does not define "sufficient," "a long period of time," or "social value." A religious group seeking official recognition applies to of Justice, which then conducts a thorough review before recommending approval or rejection. Rnal approval of recognized status is the sole responsibility ofthe Parliament; however, the Parliament generally accepts the decision of the Ministry of Justice. A group whose application is refused by the Ministry of Justice may appeal the decision to the Council of State.

The lack of recognized status does not prevent religious groups from practicing their faith freely and openly. Nonrecognized groups do not qualify for govemment SUbsidies; however, they may qualify for tax exempt status as nonprofit organizations.

Restrictions on Freedom

In response to a number of highly publicized mass suicides and murders in France, Switzerland, and Canada by members of the Solar Temple cult (including some Belgian citizens who were leaders and members) in the mid-1990s, the Parliament in 1996 established a special Commission to examine the potential dangers that sects may represent to society, especially children, and to recommend policies to deal w ith those dangers. The Commission's 1997 report divided sects into two broadly defined categories. The Commission considered as the first category of sects (defined as "organized groupsof individuals espousing the same doctrine with a religiOn")to be respectable to reflect the normal exercise of freedom of religion and assembly provided for by fundamental rights. The second category, sectarian organizations," are defined as groups having or claiming to have a philosophical religious whose organizatiOn or practice involves illegal injurious activities, individuals society, or impairs·human dignity; Attached to the report was a list of 189 .sectarian organizations that were mentioned during testimony before the CommissiOn (including groups such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Church of Scientology, and the Young Women's Christian Association). Although the iQtroduction to the list clearly stated that there was no intent to characterize any of the groups as "dangerous," the list quickly became known in the press and to thepublic as the "dangerous sects" list. The Parliament eventually adopted several of the report's recommendations but adopted the list itself. .

Some religious groups included in the 1997 parliamentary list continue to complain that their inclusion has resulted in discriminatory action against them. For example, in November 2001, the Church of Scientology was informed on the moming of a scheduled press conference that it could not use the Intemational Press Center to announce its suit against the Commission's 1997 sect list. A representative of the Center reportedly the presence of the Church of Scientology on the list as a reason for cancellation. However, several months later, the Center reviewed the refusal and decided that in the future the Church of Scientology could use the facilities. In October 2001, a non-profit bank, Fonds du Logement des Families Nombreuses de Wallonie, rejected an application for a low-interest, govemment-subsidized home loan from a devotee of IntemationalSociety for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), commonly known as the Hare Krishnagroup. The bank's rejection letter cited ISKCON's financial interest as seller of the home, ISKCON'sinclusion on the parliamentary Commission's sect list, and a fear of financing the ISKCON movement as reasons for the loan refusal. In November 2001 , according to press reports the City of Liege canceled an ISKCON permit to distribute free vegetarian food under the "Hare Krishna Food for LifeM program, a weekly practice begun in 1997. The City reportedly cited disturbance of public order as the basis for the withdrawal of the permit.

Some courts in the Flanders region continued to stipulate , in the context of child custody proceedings and as a condition of granting visitation rights, that a noncustodial parent who is a member of Jehovah's Witnesses may not expose his or her children to the teachings or lifestyle of that religious group during visits. These courts have claimed that such exposure would be harmful to the child; however, other have not imposed this restriction.

http ://www.state.gov/gldrl/rls/irf/2002113924pf.htm 19/0812003 One of the primary recommendations of the 1997 parliamentary report was the creation of a govemment sponsored Center forInformation and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations. The Center was open to the public in July 2000. The Center collects publicly available information on a wide range of religious and philosophical groups and provides information and advice to the public upon request regarding the legal rights of freedom of association, privacy, and freedom of religion. The Center's library is open to the public and contains information on religion in general as well as on specific religious groups including information provided by various groups. The Center is authorized to share with the public any information it collects on religious sects; however, it is not authorized to provide assessments of individual sectarian organizations to the general public and despite its name, the regulations prohibit it from categorizing any particular group as harmful.

The law creating the Center stipulates that the harmful nature of a sectarian group is to be evaluated in reference to principles/contained in the Constitution, orders, laws, decrees, and in international human rights instruments ratified by the Govemment. The Canter is required by law to publish a report on its acnvltles every 2 years. In December 2002, the Center released its first report, covering the period from 1999 to 2000. The report reviewed the laws creating the Center, meetings in which the Center participated, and its projects. The report identified two responses by the Center to specific government requests: a "favorable" opinion of the European Center for Research and Information on Sectarianism in response to an inquiry from the Foreign Ministry and a "favorable" opinion of the Mormon Church in response to an inquiry from the Ministry of the Interior. The report also recommended that the Ministry of Justice draft a law to prohibit the abuseofa situation of "weakness."

An interagency coordination group designed to work in conjunction with the Center to coordinate government policy meets quarterly to exchange information on sect activities. The Govemment also has designated a national magistrate and 1 in each of the 27 judicial districts to monitor cases involving sects.

The 1997 parliamentary report also recommendedthat the country's municipal govemments sponsor information campaigns to educate the public, especially children, about the phenomenon of harmful sects . A 1998 law formally charges the country's State Security with the duty of monitoring harmful sectarian organizations as potential threats to the internal security of the country. This law uses the same language as the Parliamentary Commission's report and defines "harmful sectarian organizations" as any religious or philosophical group that, throughits organization or practices, engages in activities that are illegal, injurious, or harmful to individuals or society. A subgroup of law enforcement officials meets bi-monthly to exchange information on sect activities. Most law enforcement agencies have an official specifically assigned to handle sect issues.

The Govemment permitsreligious instruction in public schools; however, students are not required to attend religion classes. Public school religion teachers are nominated by a committee from their religious group and appointed 'by the Minister of Education. All public schools have a teacher for each of the six recognized religions. A seventh choice, a nonconfessional course, is available if the does not wish a religious course . Private Catholic schools receive government subsidies for working expenses and teacher . salaries.

In February 2001 the Church of Scientologytook legal action toforce the return of documents including parishioners' confidential spiritual counseling folders seized in a 1999 police raid church facilities and the homes and businesses of approximately 20 members. No arrests were made or charges filed against church members as a result of the original raid. The Church of Scientology also filed a complaint asserting that the Prosecutor's Office provided prejudicial statements to the press in violation of country's secrecy laws regarding investigations. A second, smaller raid on the Church of Scientology's Brussels headquarters took place on February 8, 2001 and additional documents were seized. Most of the seized computer equipment was returned to the Church; however, the investigating magistrate continued to hold the documents from both raids at the end of the period covered by this report. On March6, 2001, the Church filed a complaint against the Govemment with the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance. On January 30, 2002, the Brussels Appellate Court ruled that the personal files were held lawfully by the investigating magistrate, that the Church compiled and maintained personal information in violation of privacy laws, and that the court was under no obligation to return the files.

After having suspended issuances from April to July 2000, the Government again suspended the issuance of visas to Mormon missionaries in November 2001. Although similar visas had been processed for decades without problems, the Govemment attributed the change in policy to the Foreign Worker's Act of 1999 requirement that religious workers obtain work permits before applying for a visa to enter the country for religious work. Mormon missionaries were told that they should reapply for visas after obtaining the appropriate work permits. However, since Mormon missionaries are strictly volunteers who pay their own way and receive no salary or subsidy from the Church, they do not qualify for the required work permit. Negotiations between representatives of the Mormons and the Ministry of Interior, facilitated by the U.S. Embassy, led to a resumption of the issuance of visas in July 2000 under special temporary procedures. The Government halted the issuance of visas to Mormon missionaries under these temporary procedures in November 2001. After further meetings with Embassy and Mormon Church representatives,in June 2002, the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs agreed to exempt volunteer Mormon

http://www.state.gov/gldrl/rls/irf/2002113924pf.htm 19108/2003 missionaries from the certificate requirement and to process all 85 pending visa applications.

In February 2002, police detained five American volunteer workers at an Assemblies of God school and media center for working without employment permits; four were deported shortly thereafter. The law requires employment permits, even for However, since Assemblies of God volunteers pay their own and receive no salary they do not qualify for the required work permit The church leaders closed the school for the spring term inthe wake of the deportations. The Assemblies of God is a member of the Evangelical Synod which inturn is represented on theofficiaUy recognized Protestant Synod. The Assemblies of God also is included on the parliamentary Commission's 1997 sect list. At the end of the period covered by this report, church officials continued to work with the Government to satisfy employment and immigration law requirements. . There were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees.

Forced Religious Conversion

There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of mlnoru.s, citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, or of the refusal to allow such citizens to be retumed to the United States.

Section Ill. Societal Attitudes

There are generally amicable relations among different religious groups in society; however, several religious groups complain of discrimination, particularly groups which have not been accorded official "recognized" status by the Government and those associated primarily with immigrant communities.

In the spring of 2002, several anti-Semitic incidents.directed at Jewish communities occurred, including a pro-Palestinian riot in Antwerp in April and firebombings of synagogues in Brussels and Antwerp . Unknown persons fired automatic gunfire at a synagogue in Charleroi. Government officials strongly criticized the attacks on the Jewish community increased security around synagogues and Jewish community buildings.

The President of the Muslim Executive Council reported increased anti-lstarnlc sentiment after the Fall of 2001. For example, a clearly deranged man attacked his Muslim neighborsin Brussels before committing suicide.

The President of the Muslim Executive Council reported that women and girls wearing traditional dress or headscarves some cases face discrimination in private employment even though the law does not prohibit such dress. In January 2001, the Court of Cassation, the nation's highest court, ruled that municipal authorities could not deny anidentification.card to a woman wearing a headscarf.

At the national level, there is an annual general assembly of the National Ecumenical Commission discuss various religious The Catholic Church sponsors working groups at the national level to maintain dialog and promote tolerance among all religious groups. At the local level, every Catholic diocese has established Commissions for interfaith dialog.

Section IV. U.S; Government Policy

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and poilcyof promoting human rights.

Embassy representatives discussed the issue religious freedom throughout the period covered by this report with officials from the Ministries Justice, Foreign Affairs, and Interior, as well as with Members of Parliament. Embassy officials also expressed concern regarding anti-Semitic incidents. There is an ongoing dialog between the Embassy and the Ministry of Justice at the cabinet level the implementation of recommendations of the 1997 parliamentary report on sectarian organizations. Embassy officials also met regularly with the Director of the Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations and closely monitored the center's activities. Embassy officials continued to monitor the Govemmenfs progress toward implementing a permanent solution to the Mormon visa problem and the issuance of work permits for volunteer religious workers.

Embassy officials met with representatives of both recognized and nonrecognized religions that reported some form of discrimination during the period covered by this report .

Released on October 7, 2002 http://www.state.gov/gldrlfrls/ir£.2002/13924pf.htm 19/08/2003 The Creation of'Religious' Scientology by Stephen Kent

Scientology

Subject: The Creation ofReligious' Scientology by Stephen Kent From: Edmonton Entheta Message-ID: <23082001 0235215669%[email protected]> Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:35:21 -0600 .:Organization: Videon CableSystems Alberta Inc.

The Creation of'Religious' Scientology Stephen A. Kent Departments ofSociology Universities ofAlberta Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H4

Paper Presented at the Society for the Scientific Study ofReligion, 1992. PUBLISHED IN: RELIGIOUS STUDIES THEOLOGY 18 No. 2 (December 1999): 97 126. [po 97] The Creation of'Religious' Scientology

Among the most complex and mysterious ideologies ofthe so-called new religions today is Scientology. A multinational conglomeratededicated to the propagation and implementation ofL. Ron Hubbard's beliefs and ideas, Scientology operated missions in approximately twenty-five countries and had an active membershipofat least 75,000 in the early 1990s (Kent, 1999a: 147 and n.2).(More precise and recent are exceeding difficultto acquire.) Aspects ofits elaborate ideological system relate to business practices (Hall, 1998; Passas, 1994; Passas and Castillo, 1992); educational techniques, mental health (Wallis, 1976), drug rehabilitation, moral values, environmentalism,and religion. Its religious theology and accompanying cosmology are poorly understood by researchers (for an exception see Meldgaard, 1992),1 who fail to appreciate how they motivate members, identify societal opponents, and reflect the social and financial pressures that plagued its founder and sole theologian, L. Ron Hubbard, in the early 1950s. This article documents the multifaceted self representation ofScientology as a science, a mental health therapy, and a religion during its founding years. In doing so it pays particular attention to the social, economic, and ideological pressures on Hubbard that motivated to claim religious status forhis ideas. Consequently, the study provides anin depth examination ofthe birth ofa controversial faith, and it complements an earlier analysis that viewed Hubbard's religious representations of Scientology as attempts to protect his followers from charges that they-were practising medicine without licenses (Kent, 1996: 30-33). The first part ofthis study presents the ideological content ofDianetics and its offspring, Scientology, and the second part identifies social and economic pressures that were significant factors in Hubbard's creation of Scientology's religious claims. It concludes with some [p. 98] thoughts about the development ofreligious beliefs out ofpurely secular concerns, and underscores the contemporary difficulties brought about by an historical understanding ofScientology's early years. The Basic BeliefSystem ofDianetics Hubbard first published his ideology ofmental health techniques in the third week ofApril 1950, when it appeared in the May issue ofAstounding Science Fiction. He had been discussing and developing his ideas at leastas back as the previous summer (see Miller, 1987: 147-150; Winter, 1951: 3). His Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health followed shortly after (May 9, 1950) the science fiction publication, and differed from it to some degree.2 The book's initial popularity owed much to the manner in which it addressed issues that were salient both to the science fiction community ofits day as well as to the wider society.3 Hubbard's initial ideological model was not religious, he specifically asserted that it was scientifically based. The title ofhis book, Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health (1950), suggested as much. Likewise, in the book's opening pages, Hubbard announced: The first contribution ofdianetics is the discovery that the

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/kent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 i ne or uy

problems ofthought and mental function can be resolved within the bounds ofthe finite universe, which is to say that all data needful to the solution ofmental action and Man's endeavour can be measured, sensed and experienced as scientific truths independent of mysticism or metaphysics (Hubbard, 1950b: x). In the body the book itself, Hubbard insisted that "once [a person] has used dianetics, he will not fall back to mystic efforts to heal minds" (Hubbard, 1950b: 167). He made these claims three [po 99] and a halfyears before he became involved with the founding ofScientology churches (see Atack,1990: 138), and part ofDianetics's appeal was that its goal of"clear" was one "which some patience and a little study Canbring about" (Hubbard, 1950b: 17). No indication exists that Hubbard wanted Dianetics to be considered anything other than a science when he first presented it to the world. Hubbard's dissection ofthe human mind involved a series ofclaims that he insisted were developed through careful research, although he never produced copies ofany research protocol. He asserted that people had a "sub-mind" that he called the "reactive mind" (Hubbard, 1950b: xii). This reactive mind "is always conscious" (Hubbard, xii [original emphasis]) and records (rather than remembers) all that occurs. It then impinges recordings (called "engrams") of"physical pain and painful emotion" onto "the 'conscious' mind" (called the "analytical mind" [Hubbard, 1950b: xiv; see 60]) when catalytic situations occur in relation to the one in which the reactive mind first recorded the pain (Hubbard, 1950b: xiii). The third type ofmind that an individual possesses is, according to Hubbard, the "somatic mind," which is akin to science'sautonomic nervous system because it "takes care of the automatic mechanisms ofthe body, the regulation ofthe minutiae which keep the organism running" (Hubbard, 1975: 393; see 1950: 45; Bromleyand Bracey, 1998: 144-145). Dianetic therapy involved a partner or Dianetic therapist (called an "auditor") placing "the patient in various periodsofthe patient's life merely by telling him to go there rather than remember" (Hubbard, 1950b: xiv). By returning to these painful occurrences, a "patient" was supposed to have eventually erased the engrams along with their negative effects and attains a state called "clear," in which "full memory exists throughout the lifetime" (Hubbard, 1950b: xv). Furthermore, a clear allegedly was entirely free from "any and all psychoses, neuroses, compulsions and repressions (all aberrations) and ... any (self-generated) diseases referred to as psycho-somatic ills" (Hubbard, 1950b: 8).IQ also "soars" (Hubbard, 1950b: 90). Hubbard even claimed that [p. 100] Dianetics techniques could recover "prenatal engrams" (Hubbard, 1950b: xvii; for a more extensive summary see Atack, 1990: 109-113). (In contrast to the reactive and analytic minds, the somatic mind plays a minor role in both Dianetics and Scientology systems.) Within months after the appearance ofDianetics, practitioners were claiming to find engrams caused by experiences in past lives (see Whitehead, 1974: 579). By October, 1950, Joseph Winter (who was a medical doctor) resigned from the Board of Directors ofthe Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation in New Jersey; partly because he was "alarmed by the auditing of'past lives,' which he considered [to be] entirely fanciful" (Atack, 1990: 115; see Winter, 1951: 188-191). On this same issue Hubbard also ran into trouble with one ofhis early financial backers, Don Purcell, apparently during the summer of 1951 (Miller, 1987: 197; see Hubbard, 1951: 61 n.). Increasingly, however, beliefin (and Dianeticists would insist, experience of) past lives became part ofHubbard's unfolding pseudo-scientific ideology, and he discussed the concept in his second Dianetics book, Science ofSurvival (Hubbard, 1951: 61; see Miller, 1987: 194). The next year (1952), Hnbbard was insisting that auditors would achieve only mediocre results unless they took patients (now called "pc's" or "preclears") "prior to this lifetime" (Hubbard, 1952b: 6). By 1958, it appears"thatmuch of Scientology's "Advanced Clinical Course" at England's Hubbard Association ofScientology International (HASI) "was devoted to students investigatingeach other's past lives" (Miller, 1987: 231).4 He insisted, however, that "[p]ast lives are not 'reincarnation'.... There evidently is no gradient scale ofadvance, as in theories ofreincarnation, but there are cases on record of preclears who got well after a life as a dog or other animal was run out by a Scientologist" (Hubbard, 1958: 18, 18-19). The secular reasons that Dianetics auditors uncovered past lives-which became centralto Scientology's pseudo-scientific and religious claims--stemmed from social-psychological and ideological pressures that likely existed inside Dianetics and [p. 101] Scientology centres 1950 to 1953. These pressures almcst http://v.'WW.bolysmoke.org!coslkent-fake-re1igion.htm 27/0812003 certainly contributed to clients believing that they were discovering past life information. Wallis, for example, suggested that "coaching the pre-clear may have had an important part in the effective running ofDianetic auditing" (Wallis, 1976: 41, see 42n.1) and that ""[i]t is not hard to see how a conviction ofpast lives would develop out ofDianetic technique." What may have happened is that failures to clear individuals who had examined what they conceived were their basic engrams propelled them to believe that "there must necessarily be an earlier incident to resolve" (Wallis, 1976: 90). Some evidence suggests that Hubbard "briefly resisted the notion that this material [in pre-clears'cases] emanated from past lives" (Wallis, 1976: 90), but byJune 1952 (and probably much earlier) Hubbard himselfwas leading suggestible people into life recalls involving lives in other galaxies.5 Hubbard and his followers could have maintained their discussions ofreputedly past life data strictly within a pseudo-scientific Dianetics framework (see Miller, 1987: 203). In, for example, his August 1, 1951 book, Science ofSurvival, Hubbard claimed that "evidence is growing--good evidence ofa highly scientific nature on a much more practical level than parapsychology--that the human soul does exist in fact" (Hubbard, 1951: 7). That discussion, however, already had become commonplace among Dianeticists,many ofwhom nonetheless had become disappointed with their ideology's techniques and results (see Wallis, 1976: 87). Hubbard's eventual translation ofallegedly past life recall into an ideology ofthe soul allowed him to make claims about the superiority ofScientology over Dianetics as part ofhis efforts to regain "control over the Dianetics community" (Wallis, 1976: 91). It also allowed him to reach out to new members of the public who were outside ofscience fiction fandom (Spencer, 1981: 171, see 181). In addition to past lives, another reputed discovery that remains central to Scientology practice to this day is the utility ofusing an electro-psychometer (called by members an E-meter) when auditing (Atack, 1990: 126; Miller, 1987: 201). This device [po 102] supposedly gave accurate measurements ofemotions through small electrical currents that flowed through thejnachine's wires into. tin cans that the pre-clear held and which registered on a dial that was adjustable to sensitivity. Hubbard introduced it to the Dianetics community on March 3rd, 1952, and very quickly his followers were using these machines to unravel the reputed engrams ofcurrent (or 'present-time') and past lives. The BasicBeliefSystem ofScientology A. Thetans and Creation on the heels ofthe Esmeter's introduction was Hubbard's self-proclaimed revelation he had discovered the human soul, the study ofwhich he called Scientology. claimed, only addressed the body (Miller, 1987:203), but Scientology explored the ',; souls(which he called thetans) from their in the physical' ' umverse or matenal world (called MEST or "matter, energy, space, and time" [Hubbard,'1975: 248; see Wallis, 1976: Nowhere did Hubbard present a concise, coherent description about the formation and evolution ofthe universe and the thetans in it. I, however, will attempt to systematize Scientology's cosmology, and will do byfollowing its chronological unfoldment as much as possible. Hubbard's cosmology stated that originally there existed an energy "separate and distinct from the physical universe" called "theta' (Hubbard, 1975: 429). Theta may be the same as Scientology's "eighth dynamic"--the Supreme Being, which "the science ofScientology does not intrude into" (Hubbard, 1956: 38). Under obscure and poorly described conditions, the single theta blew apart, and individual thetans formed from the explosion. These thetans are spirits or souls, and each one begins its existence having "no mass, no wave-length, no energy and no time or location in space except by consideration [i.e., thought] or postulate [i.e., [p, 103] self-created truth]" (Hubbard, 1975: 432, see 90, 304). In essence, at first these thetans have the same qualities as theta. Hubbard, however, was not clear about how a thetan was different from a static, which "is something without mass, without wavelength, without time, and actually withoutposition." (Hubbard, 1975: 405). Thetans do have, however, the ability to create, which soon becomes crucial for the unfolding ofuniverses (Hubbard, 1956: 55; 1975: 432). At some point thetans form their own universes, each ofwhich is called a "home universe" (Hubbard, 1975: 199). The creations ofeach universe involved "making illusions," almost as forms ofplay or game (see Hubbard, 1981: 4). Again in a process that Hubbard described poorly, one thetan "got a universe and it just ate [the otherthetan's] universe all up. And this is what the mest universe is doing. Evidently it is an expanding universe and it just keeps on eating into everybody's time and

.http://www.holysmoke.org/coslkent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 space" (Hubbard, 1981: 4; see Hubbard, 1952b: 47). A number ofsignificant doctrinal developments emerged from the account about thetans. Hubbardclaimed, for example, that thetans had to inhabit bodies along with lesser entities known as 'theta bodies' or 'body thetans.' The uncoupling ofthetans from theta bodies became the basis for the secret OT levels that appeared in the mid-1960s (Atack, 1990: 129), and was central to the story that Scientologists read in OT rn. B. OT ill The events in OT III allegedly occurred 75,000,000 years ago, but Hubbard claimed that he first unravelled them 1967 (presumably through auditing). He called these events "Incident 2." Most significant was the solution to .:overpopulation engineered byXenu (orXemu), who was head ofa groupof76 planets called the Galactic Confederation that each had populations averaging 178 billion. He transported people to Teegeeack (i.e., Earth), then set offhydrogen bombs on the major volcanoes (which, ofcourse, killed the people). The people's souls or "thetans" that survived [po 104] were transported (both from the Pacific area to Hawaii and from the Atlantic area to Las Palmas, Canary Islands) and grouped together as "clusters." Xenu's renegade supporters (elsewhere identified as priests and psychiatrists) implanted the thetans with false and misleading information, some ofwhich involved concepts ofGod and the Devil. (These implanted clusters are body thetans that the Scientology's OT level courses aspire to separate and free.) After Xenu's "crime," officers who were loyal to the people attacked him but could not capture him for six years. After succeeding, they punished him by placing him in an electronic jail in a mountain where he remains today (text reproduced in Corydon, 1996: 357; Corydon and Hubbard, 1987: 364; see Atack, 1990: 31-32; Lamont, 1986: 50-51).6 Also contained in this OT material was "Incident 1," which was an implant that allegedly took place some four quadrillion years ago and was "the gateway to our universe" (Atack, 1990: 32). As Atack summarized it: The unsuspecting Thetan was subjected to a short, high-volume crack, followed bya flood ofluminescence, and then saw a chariot followed by a trumpetitig cherub. After a loud set ofcracks, the Thetan was overwhelmed by darkness (Atack, 1990: 32). In any case, these alleged body thetans clarify for Scientologists why they can be "clear" but still have emotional or physical problems. In essence, Scientologists believe not only that they have to rid themselves ofpast life engrams in addition to current life (or "present time") ones, but also that some ofthese engrams dated from eons ago and have to be discovered through Scientology techniques. Hubbard's attitudes about two groups, Christian religious leaders and psychiatrists,become additional important theological developments connected with Scientology's doctrines aboutthetans. [po 105] C. Implants About Christianity As Hubbard's cosmology evolved (see Meldgaard, 1992: 172-177), it became increasingly clear that these two occupations allegedly had performed the implanting for Xenu. In essence, Hubbard stated the Christian doctrines emphasized sexual control ifnot abstinence, humility, and salvation through Jesus' crucifixion simply were implants designed to prevent the thetan or soul from realizing its true nature (see Hubbard, 1954a: 25-26) . Neither Hubbard nor his organization widely publicized his beliefs about the harmful roles that implanting priests and psychiatrists played in the cosmological past, nor did they publicize Hubbard's beliefthat both occupations continued to implant people in contemporary time.7 A related implant was the Christian doctrine ofheaven, a place in 1963 (or in Scientology dating ADl3[i.e., thirteen years after the publication ofDianetics in 1950]) that Hubbard claimed to have visited. In an HCOB (Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin), Hubbard announced that he, along with all Scientologists, had been to heaven, but only he was able to remember what it was like because he had uncovered the process ofimplanting as it twice occurred to him many trillions ofyears ago. Regarding his alleged first visit, Hubbard described the Gates ofHeaven, the statues ofsaints that led up to them, and the marble angels that sat at the.gates' pillars. The grounds ofheaven were like Pasadena, California's Bush [sic: Busch] Gardens. The implanting supposedly took place in a town, which included a sidewalk, bistro, train tracks, bank, and several other structures. Regarding the second supposed visit, heaven was much shabbier, with the vegetation missing, the pillars dilapidated, and the saints and angels absent. Hell appeared as a pit or hole that Hubbard compared to an archaeological dig. An effigy ofJoseph existed that was leading a donkey that carried Mary and the baby Jesus from Bethlehem. In any case, heaven was not place floating in the sky but instead on a mountain ofa planet, the name http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/kent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 ofwhich Hubbard did not provide (Hubbard, 1963a). [p, 105] In bothcases, the implants seem designed to make thetansnot only forget about past lives but also believe that being in heaven was a desirable goal (Hubbard, 1963a: 2-3). His alleged discoveries about the true purpose of heaven explained why there has been such religious insanity throughout history (Hubbard, 1963a: 4). Further publications discussed additional implants, including some that supposedly took in trains, others that occurred when thetans met.the Marcab Invasion force in this universe (Hubbard, 1963c), and stillothers that always took place in the presence ofeither gorillas or gorilla symbols (Hubbard, 1963b). Admittedly, non-Scientologists have difficulty or appreciating much ofthis (to use Scientology's term) "space opera" cosmology,8 and several commentators on Hubbardhave suggested that reputed such as these and others (specificallyincluding the OT ill material) were influenced by his drug abuse.9 Nonetheless, point about the contents ofhis reputed trips to heaven seems rational obvious. Among Scientology's cosmic enemies were people whose Christian religious views pitted them against his organization's own religious claims. Cosmology, it seems, parallelled real life, as social scientists would expect. 10 Implants from Cosmic Devils-- .PsychiatristsHubbard's hatred ofpsychiatrists was unbounded, and he battled them other mental health professions in countries around the world through a Scientology-sponsored group called theCitizens Commission on Human Rights (Kent, 1999a: 150-151, 157; see Bowles, 1996: 1013-1015) and, since 1984, the International Association ofScientologists (International Association ofScientologists, 1993). He despised their therapies, he reviled for some doctors' use ofpsycho-surgery (suchas lobotomies), he excoriated them for using electroshock therapy, and he coveted their alleged influence overgovernments and education. In all areas ofmental health, Hubbard was convinced [po 107] that psychiatry had destructive influence, and he was determined to replace that influence with Scientology. Viewing Dianetics, Hubbard seems to have believed his techniques as worthwhile mental (and often physical) health techniques (see Kent, 1996: 30-33). In Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health, Hubbard began his public attack on the medical (and especially the psychiatric) professions in a manner that both condemned their techniques and invited them to adopt the . techniques ofhis new pseudo-scientific ideology. As he did throughout the rest ofhis life, Hubbard condemned psychiatrists for their alleged use ofvarious forms ofelectric shock and psycho-surgery (see Hubbard, 1950b: 151). Members ofthe psychiatric community, however, replied in a series ofstinging book reviews. While a couple ofreviews by medical"doctors were favourable (F.L., 1950: 45-46; Wolffe, 1951: 70), others hammered or ridiculed Hubbard's book and the therapeutic techniques that it outlined (see Fishbein, 1950). A critical review, for example, in.the October, 1950 issue ofAmerican Scientist concluded: [a]ny intelligent reader with scientific orientation will find serious flaws in the Hubbard logic and will be aware ofthe fundamental shakiness ofthe substructure. Apart from the highly . questionable basic assumptions, there are countless passages in this which imperil its claim to scientific status (Gittleson, 1950: 607). Other reviews from the period were even more condemning and sometimes ridiculed Hubbard himself(see Bures, 1950: 32; Peck, 1950; Rabi, 1951; Steams, 1951). While we cannot be sure that Hubbard read any ofthese reviews, it seems likely that he realized how chilly ifnot hostile prominent persons in the medical and scientific communities were to his ideas. Certainly the Dianetics community was aware of these criticisms, and members fought back by "bombarding the offending publications with indignant letters" (Miller, 1987: 161). [po 108] Anydoubt, however, in Hubbard's mind about the medical community's hostility would have been removed in January 195.1, when the New JerseyBoard ofMedical Examiners accused Elizabeth, New Jersey's Hubbard Dianetics Research Foundation of"teaching medicine without a licence" (Elizabeth Daily Journal, 1951; see Miller, 1987: 174). In response, Hubbard's enmity toward the mental health profession grew to religious, and at times cosmic, dimensions (Church ofScientology, 1969: 5; Hubbard, 1982a). In his mind, "psychs" had been causing dysfunctions for eons. Thus, when he identified pain and sex as "two items in this universe that cause more trouble than many others combined," Hubbard indicted the "psychs" utilizing them in their techniques (Hubbard, 1982b: 1-2).11 Moreover, the first international edition ofFreedom had a cartoon on the front cover ofhorned, goateed, cloven-hoofed, pointed-tailed psych devils electro- http://www.holysmoke.org/coslkent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 - "

shocks and lobotomies on the peoples ofthe world (Church ofScientology, 1969: 1). Hubbard thought that they had beenperfonning analogous implants throughoutpeople's past lives. Emerging Religious Claims Unrelated to Hubbard's hostility toward some religions (most notably Christianity) and his attempts appropriate major traditions (such as Buddhism, Taoism, and parts ofHinduism [see Hubbard, 1969: 10-35; Kent, 1996]) into his own ideology, Scientology as a religious system contains some unique supernatural elements. These supernatural elements are central to its cosmology and its soteriology, even ifthey remain marginal to most aspects oforganizational operations. A fierce debate rages, however, between Scientology its critics over the sincerity ofHubbard's initial religious claims. Critics insist that the "religion" ofScientology either was Hubbard's scheme designed to avoid taxes or was his attempt toregain lost control over the Dianetics organization. Miller, for example, who played on the phrase, "bare-faced liar" for the title of [po 109] the biography (Bare-Faced Messiah) that he wrote on Hubbard, takes a cynical position (Miller, 1987: 199 203). In Miller's words, "Hubbard would introduce Scientology as a logical extension of Dianetics, but it was a development ofundeniable expedience, since it ensured that he would be able to stay in business even ifthe courts eventually awarded control of'Dianetics and its valuable copyrights to ... [former financial backer, Don] Purcell" (Miller, 1987:202-203). As we shall see, Hubbard's organizations had been under attack by regulators and creditors, and the representation ofScientology as a religion gave the movement new financial advantages. Miller uncovered a letter (dated April-10, 1953) in which Hubbard was plotting "'to make real money" by "'developing the religion angle.'" In a letter that he wrote in London and sent Helen O'Brien (who at thetime ran an independent but loyal Scientology office in Philadelphia [see Miller, 1987: 194; Wallis, 1976: 127]), Hubbard insisted: We don't need a clinic. We want one in operation, but not in name. Perhaps we could call it a Spiritual Guidance Center. Think up a name, will you? And we could put in nice desks and our boys in

neat blue with diplomas on the walls and one, knock psychotherapy into history and, two, '. make enough money to shine up my operating scope, and three, keep the HAS [Hubbard :... Association ofScientologists] solvent. It is a problem in practical business. I await your .. ( reaction on the religion angle [presumably referring to a Spiritual Guidance Center], In my ;. . opinion, we couldn't getworse public opinion than we have had or have less customers with what we've got to sell. A religious charter would be necessary in Pennsylvania or N.J. to make it stick. But I sure could make it stick. We're treating the present time beingness. [po110]treats the past and the brain. And brother that's religion, not mental science (read into court ofCalifornia Superior Court, 1984: 1976..1977; also in Corydon, 1996: 330). section ofthe same letter gave even stronger evidence that Hubbard was plotting to transform Scientology into a financially lucrative enterprise: Ifwe were able to return there [Phoenix] we'd be able to count on.10 to 15 preclears per week at $500 for 24 hours ofprocessing. That is real money. I have seen it happen before. We get more preclears at $850 per week intensive. Charge enough and we'd be swamped. We need that money. We should not long plan to have it siphoned away (California Superior Court, 1984: 4620) . Although a few ofthese passages are open to varying interpretations, Miller and other critics (for example, Corydon and Hubbard, 1987: 310) interpret them to indicate that Hubbard saw religion as a way to make money and protect his techniques from scrutiny by mental health and medical regulators (and likely tax agents) whiletrying to replace psychotherapy. As these critics realized, financial and organizational pressures weighed heavily upon Hubbard in the early 1950s. By early 1953 he had experienced 'financial and organizational setbacks. In addition to the probe in January 1951 by the New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners, Hubbard lost his Dianetic organization in Wichita, Kansas in February 1952 (Miller, 1987: 199-200). Moreover, in December, 1952 Hubbard signed a court agreement to make restitution for over $9,000 that he had taken from the Wichita operation (Miller, 1987: 211). Consequently, critics insist that financial difficulties motivated him to seek money-making schemes during the period between 1952 and early 1953. [po 111] Moreover, their argument has merit, since explains Hubbard's shift toward religion in a manner contrary to his original antipathy it in Dianetics: The Modem Science of Mental Health. While is true the alleged evidence about past lives emerged early in http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/kent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 Dianetics auditing, Hubbard did not give the material a religious interpretation until after he experienced financial strain and membership decline. Arguably, he capitalized on the opportunity that presented itselfby the past life material to develop religious claims out ofa pseudo-therapy (see Atack, 1990: 125). Hubbard's introduction ofreligion into Scientology (which formally occurred at the end of 1953) traces to an April 28, 1953 newsletter in which he tried to chart the continuity from Dianetics to Scientology. In the first two sentences ofthe piece Hubbard teased his audience with the observation that: It probably has not occurred to the field [offollowers] at large what I am attempting to do in the relationship to theta clearing and aberration. Theta clearing-even to auditors who have taken the course, continues to be something very special, perhaps allied with religion, perhaps a mystic practice, and possibly just another form ofChristian Science or plain Hubbardian nonsense (Hubbard, 1953b: 315). Five days before that newsletter (on April 23, 1953), Hubbard advised readers that the next issue ofThe Journal ofScientology would contain "Ihe Factors, which announces the gaining ofthe highest echelon planned at this time for Scientology" (Hubbard, 1953a: 312). The Factorsappeared in mid-June 1953, and its first ten statements (out ofthe total thirty) provided Scientology with something like a philosophical creation story: [po 112]1. Before the beginning was a Cause and the entire purpose ofthe Cause was the creation ofeffect. 2. In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE. The first action of beingnessis to assume a viewpoint. 4. The second action ofbeingness is to extend from the viewpoint, points to view, which are dimension points. 5. Thus there is space created, for the definition ofspace is: viewpoint ofdimension. And the purpose ofa dimension is reaching and withdrawing. 6. The action ofa dimension point is reaching and withdrawing. 7. And from the viewpoint to the dimension points there are connection and interchange. Thus new dimension points are made. Thus there is communication. -8. And thus there is light. 9. And thus there is energy. 10. And thus there is life (Hubbard, 1953c: 375). Elsewhere in the publication Hubbard began making tentative connections between Scientology and religion. He formulated the awkward category, "Para-Scientology," in which he placed what called "all greater or lesser uncertainties" such as "Dianetics, incidents on the 'whole track,' the immortality ofMan, the existence.ofGod," as well as "past lives, mysterious influences, astrology, mysticism, religion, psychology, psychiatry, nuclear physics and any other science based on theory" (Hubbard, 1953c: 377). Scientology, Hubbard asserted, was the science certainty, and Dianetics (like the other beliefs and practices that he mentioned) "is a specialized thing based on theory which, no matter how workable, requires specialized observation" (Hubbard, 1953c: 377). Presumably this distinction makes sense to some of Hubbard's followers. 113] Apparently propelled by secular reasons to develop in a religious context the past life material that had emerged within Dianetics, and having provided a creation story ofsorts to his followers in the doctrinal list called "The Factors," Hubbard, in December 1953, incorporated in New Jersey three new churches. were the Church of American Science (which was the parent organization ofthe other two), the Church of Scientology, and the Church ofSpiritual Engineering. Soon afterward (February 18, 1954), Dr. J. Burton Farber incorporated the Church ofScientology ofCalifomia (Aberee, 1954: 1,4; Miller, 1987: 220). After early March, 1954, Scientology auditors began receiving ordination in the Church ofAmerican Science (see Aberee, 1954: 4), which had within its chartered creed its intention "[t]o practice the teachings and beliefs and to propagate in accordance with its tenets healing ofthe sick and suffering by prayer or other spiritual means without the use of drugs or material remedy" (Certificate ofIncorporation, 1953: 3). In August, 1954 Hubbard acknowledged that to some people his recent efforts to connect Scientology with religion "seems [like] mere opportunism, to some it would seem that Scientologyis simply making itselfbulletproofin the eyes ofthe law, and to some it might appear that any association with religion is a reduction ofthe ethics and purposes ofScientology itself' (Hubbard, 1954b: 1). He, ofcourse, denied the validity ofthese charges, and asserted the connections between Scientology, the Vedas, and Buddhism (Hubbard, 1954b). Nevertheless, amidst a growing number ofreligious assertions, Hubbard insisted (in a January 31, 1954 publication), 3Scientology has opened the gates to a better World. It is not a psycho-therapy nor a religion. It is a body ofknowledge which, when properly used, gives freedom and truth to the individual- http://www.holysmoke.org/coslkent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 (Hubbard, 1954e: 5). It seems very likely, however, that the charges about opportunism essentially were true, and in his denial Hubbard did not acknowledge the protection that religion would provide his group in California. Evidence about the essential truth ofthe charges comes from an April 1954, article on Scientology's new religious direction that appeared in a publication ofa [po 114] break-offScientology group in Phoenix, Arizona. When discussing the reaction ofPhoenix Scientologists to these churches, the article indicated: [t]he news was received with mixed emotions. Some were outspokenly antagonistic to the idea. Some who'd nursed the glories ofself-determinism since Book One [Dianetics: The Modern Science ofMental Health] couldn't subscribe to the new idea that the best way to win is to BECOME the enemy [i.e., religion]. Many from California feared that designating Scientology as a religion would classify it with the state's 9,957,385,237 1/2 cults. In announcingthe action, officials ofthe H.A.S. [Hubbard Association ofScientologists] stated that there is little doubt but what this stroke will remove Scientologyfrom the target area ofovert and covert attacks by the medicalprofession, who see their pills, scalpels, and appendix-studded incomes threatened.... With the formation ofthe Church ofScientology in the State ofCalifornia by Dr. J.Burton Farber ofGlendale, and the granting ofa charter, auditors in that area can avoid the recent fiasco in which a Pasadena practitioner is reported to have spent 10 days in that city's torture chamber [i.e., prison] for 'practicing medicine without a license'. OnMarch 5, Dr. Farber appeared in Phoenix, and before 30 clinical students, taped a ceremony in which L. Ron Hubbard was made Doctor ofDivinity and awarded Certificate No. One. This gives him legal authority to lecture, perform marriages, baptisms, and other religious rites (Aberre, 1954: 1,4). Having had his New Jersey foundation raided in January 1951 for allegedly teaching medicine without a licence, Hubbard likely realized that "the religion angle" would insulate his fledging Scientology practices from secular regulators. Also in his denial ofopportunism Hubbard did not indicate how his identification ofScientology as a religion contributed to his diverse marketing [po 115] effortsfor his movement. In the spirit ofhis earlier comment to O'Brien about making money through a week-long intensive course that would cost $850.00, Hubbard's Advanced Clinical Course (which already was on its fifth series by May 10, 1954) cost $800.00 and gave Scientologists the opportunity to receive certificates as a Doctor of Scientology, a Freudian Psycho-analyst, or a Doctor ofDivinity (Hubbard, 1954c: 32). Through these three degrees Hubbard could market Scientology as a science (through the Doctor ofScientology), a therapy (psychoanalysis), or a religion (through the divinity degree). As he told his followers, "[b]ecause ofthe legal situation in various places, The Church of Scientology [i.e., religion] is your best bet in such areas. Alliance with the Freudian Foundation [i.e., therapy] is possible. Continuing as an HAS [Hubbard Association of Scientologists, a pseudo-science] associate is possible (Hubbard, 1954c: 34). Late in the next month (April 30, 1954), Hubbard quipped that "[sjeeing that Scientology can embrace a science, a religion, a psychotherapy, one ofthe wittier DScns [Doctor ofScientologists] invented Scientocracy, which is 'Government ofthe people, by the thetans'" (Hubbard, 1954d: 54). Presumably Hubbard liked the term and what it represented, since it epitomized the goal ofhis Scientology movement. ConclusionThe Secular Origins ofan Insistent Religion Economic circumstances and social pressure propelled Hubbard first to transform his Dianetics creation into the grander system ofScientology, then to assert that his scientific creation actually was religious in nature. Critics ofthe organization who understand these transformations often resist its contemporary religious presentations, believing that it continues to use religion as an expedient device to gain the freedom to operate with minimal governmental interference. Members, however, are almost certainly unaware ofthe early historical complexities intheir [po 116] organization's past, and probably care little about them. In that way, Scientologists differ little from others who hold positions offaithcritical historical understanding rarely is a factor influencing people's beliefs and practices. People's experiences oftheir faith's claims, usually in the context ofcommunities whose members act collectively according to its tenets, play far greater roles in explaining why people consider themselves to be religious. In Scientology's-case, current members probably care little about the financial pressures that bore down upon the founder oftheir faith. Scholars ofreligion, however, may find the information useful (c.f. Wilson, 1990: 282-283); since the flexibility http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/kent-fake-religion.htrn 27/08/2003 that these religious claims gave Scientology in its early days continues into the present. While religious practices (in contrast with religious beliefs) are scrutinized by various governmental authorities, religious bodies nonetheless receive financial benefits and social status that few secular bodies can rival. Scientology's religious claims operate as a legitimating device (see Kent, 1990: 397-398,402). This device allows the organization to engage the wider culture in ways that would be closed to it ifit were to adhere to Hubbard's initial scientific assertions, while at the same time these claims provide it with a degree ofprotection from some forms of governmental incursion (including taxes [see Saunders and Appleby, 1998]) in many Western countries. Not surprisingly, therefore, countries like Germany that scrutinize Scientology carefully (see Freeman, 1997; Hexham and Poewe, 1999) pay considerable attention to the complicated historical circumstances ofthe organizationIS initial religious claims, since they view them as expedient devices (see Kent, 1999b). ENDNOTES

Go Back to Shy David's Scientology Page.

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/kent-fake-religion.htm 27/08/2003 the fishman affidavit

fishman index

new search ' . subscribe Declaration of Steven Fishman guestbook statistics DECLARATION OF STEVEN FISHMAN home I, StevenFishman, declare as follows: me 1. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, unless stated on information and belief, and if called upon to testify to those facts I could and would competently do so.

2. I am a Defendant in the case of Church of Scientology v. Steven Fishman and Uwe W. Geertz. I am currently serving a five year sentence for mail fraud and I am under the direct custody of the Bureau of Prisons. I am currently housed in Dismas House, a "half-way house" run by the Bureau of Prisons, and under the direct supervision of the Community Corrections Manager of the Southern District of Florida. My release date from incarceration is June 28, 1993.

3. I prohibited from leaving the Southern District of Florida during my incarceration. After my period of incarceration, I will be under the supervision of the United States Parole Commission, from June 29, 1993 until November 28, 1993, and I am prohibited from leaving the Southern District of Florida. After my period of Parole, I will be under the supervision of the United

(0017)

States Probation Office, from November 29, 1993 until November 1995, and I am prohibited from leaving the Southern District of Florida, without permission of the United States Probation Office or as ordered by the Court.

4. Due to the period of incarceration, parole and supervised release, it is very difficult if not impossible for me to conduct discovery and/or prepare for trial which is tentatively scheduled to occur in the summer of 1993. The trial is scheduled to take place in the Central District of California.

5. This very Court this very action declared me indigent pursuant to a Motion to Proceed in Forma pauperis signed by the honorable Judge Harry L. Hupp on May 28, 1992.

6. My financial condition is still indigent . I am employed as a receptionist and data entry clerk at the

http://www.xs-lall.nlz-kspaink/fisbman/declarat.html 18/09/2003 wage of $ 5.00 per hour. My gross pay is $ 200.00 per week, as I work a forty hour week. My net pay after deductions is $ 164.00 per week . Out of that check pay $ 50.00 in subsistence payments to the Dismas House, and I make child support payments of $ 41.00 per week to my ex-wife, Jaime Lee Nureyev, in to help support my two minor children. I further make a monthly non-committed fine payment of $ 25.00 to the Debt Collection Unit of the - - 4 - (0018)

Northern District of California and I contribute $ 20 .00 per week to the support of My father, Jack Fishman, who is also destitute and has been adjudicated bankrupt by the Southern District of Florida, and is living only on his social security chock. I wish the Court to know that I am indigent and destitute and besides not being able to afford the cost of bringing witnesses to testify at trial in the Central District of Cdlifornia I cannot afford even a plane ticket or money for a hotel room to come out there for the trial myself.

7. I cannot afford nor been able to afford to conduct discovery in this nor to issue subpoenas, hire court reporters etc., in the Central District of California, a jurisdiction which is convenient for the Plaintiff but not for myself as a Defendant in this case.

8. Although my ability to conduct discovery in either jurisdiction is impossible due to my financial circumstances I ask the Court to recognize my right to attend my own trial as the Defendant, which would be impossible in California unless my traveling and hotel expenses were paid for by the Plaintiff or my co-Defendant, and I do not wish to be a burden upon either of them. If the case were transferred to the Southern District of Florida under 28 U.S.C. 1404(m), ! would be able to attend my trial Defendant in this case since no travel or

-. -5- (0019)

hotel expenses are involved.

9. I do not expect my financial situation to change in the foreseeable future. I also still personally owe in excess of $ 10,000 in credit card debt, some of which I used to purchase books and tapes from Bridge Publications Inc., the publishing house of the Church of Scientology, while I was still brainwashed and under the mind contrrol of the Scientology cult.

10. I have been ordered by Counselor Roxana Boyco and Director Tammy Jodway of Dismas House, as well as Mr. Conrad Lopez of the Bureau of Prisons to begin my required Mental Health Aftercare at the Henderson Clinic South, a psychiatric out-patient treatment center in Hollywood, Florida. My treatment begins on March 9, 1993, and may require psychotropic medication, according to Ruth Watkins

http://www.xs4all.nIJ-kspaink/fishman/declarat.html 18/09/2003 at the clinic. I may not be reemitted by my treating psychiatrist to discontinue treatment during the period of time required for my trial appearance in California, even if the Court were to order the Bureau of Prisons to allow me to appear in California, and even if any expenses were to be paid for by either the Plaintiff or Defendant Geertz, which is not likely-or customary. I will need to call Margery Wakefield as a witness. Margery is a Florida resident. As an

-6- (0020)

of Scientology, and as a victim of abuse while a member of the cult, she will be called upon to testify as to the illegal and criminal practices Of the Church of scientology,· as well as information regarding the Church's policies on suicides, murder and the Church policy known as "changing I cannot afford to bring Margery Wakefield as a witness to California. Margery wakefield told me that she is also indigent and destitute but has indicated that she would appear as a witness if the case were brought to trial in the Southern District of Florida. She is a key witness in my defense.

12. Dr. Ron Johnson is a doctor of veterinary medicine and a resident of Fort Lauderdale, Florida. I wish to be able to call him to trial in order to testify regarding my membership in the Church of Scientology in the year 1981, a fact strongly disputed by the Church in their attempt to cover up their involvement in the crimes for which I am charged in the criminal case. I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

13. Dr. Ron Neuhring is a psychologist from Miami, Florida. He was my Fishman's treating psychologist when I was first arrested at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, a Federal prison facility. Dr. Neuhring will be called to testify my mental state at the time of my arrest, as well as statements which I made to him regarding my

-7- (0021)

involvement with the Church of Scientology. I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

14. Special Agent Angelo Troncoso the Internal Revenue Service is a resident of the Tampa, Florida area. I will call him to testify to his knowledge of the criminal investigation being conducted by the internal Revenue Service into the Church of Scientology, and to extent of knowledge and details supplied to him by myself, establishing to the Court his understanding of my familiarity with upper-level Church management decisions and business. I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

15. Special Agent Terry R. Kroggel is a Certified

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspainklfishman/declarat.html 18/09/2003 Public Accountant with the Internal Revenue Service and a resident of the St. Petersburg, Florida area. I will call him to testify to my knowledge of the civil investigation being conducted by the Internal Revenue Service into the Church of Scientology, and to the extent of familiarity with details supplied to him by myself, establishing my the his understanding of my knowledge of upper-level Church management decisions and business. I cannot afford -to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

16. Detective Dennis Angelo is an with

-8- (0022)

the Clearwater Police Department, and is a resident of the Florida area. I will call him to testify to his knowledge of the civil investigation being conducted by the Clearwater Police Department into the Church of Scientology, and to the extent of familiarity with details supplied to him by myself, establishing my knowledge of upper-level Church management decisions and business. I cannot afford to bring witness to California in order to testify.

17. Dr. Enyin Aksu is a psychiatrist who is a resident of Broward County Florida. Dr. Aksu was my treating physician at the time when I was an in-patient the Hollywood pavilion psychiatric facility in 'Hol l ywood , Florida, from February 13, 1989 until march 20, 1989. Dr. Aksu will be called to testify regarding my mental state at the time of my involuntary commitment in the mental hospital, as well as statements made to him by myself Fishman regarding my involvement with this Church of Scientology. I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

18. I will also need to call certain hostile witnesses are staff members of the Church of Scientology, including but not limited to Mr. Frank Thompson, Mr. Ray Jourdain, Mr. Humberto Fontana,. Ms. Beverly Flahan, Mr. Luis Gonzales, Mr. Charles Fox, Mr.

-9- (0023)

Mark Witt, Mr. Michael Hambrick, Mr. Peter Letterese, Mrs. Barbara Fawcett Letterese, Ms. Denise Franklin MoncoMancha Ms. Fran Hardy Andrews, Ms . Barbara Koster, Ms,. Leona Littler Grimm, Ms. Celia Alvarez, Mr. Tom Staley, Ma . .Karen Staley, Ms, Shirley Hambrick, Ms. Abady, Ms. Colette Atzel, Mr. Jamie Gurlaccio, Mr. Bob Levy, Mr. Doug Carr, Mr. Roberto Naya, Ms. Nancy Witkowski, Mr. Paul Dibble, Ms. Linda Miller, Ms. Vicki Kirkland, Mr. Roggie Monce, and others who are residents of either Dade or Broward County, Florida. These witnesses will be called upon to testify regarding the physical abuse and hypnosis performed upon myself, as well as Church policies regarding these practices. Some will be asked to testify regarding the Church policy regarding suicide and murder, ' a s well as

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink/fishmanfdeclarat.html 18/09/2003 specific orders directing me to assassinate Dr. Geertz and to have me Defendant commit suicide under the auspices of an "End of Cycle" order. Others will be asked to testify regarding the Church's involvement and direction in ordering me to commit securities class action fraud in a Church operation known an Operation Acting Classes, for which I was .arrested and plead guilty in an Alford Plea (of innocent but responsible for the acts alleged), and other criminal acts was directed to commit on behalf of the cult, including the Ethics Bait Project and Bingoing. I cannot afford to bring any of these or other similarly situated witnesses to California for the trial, as they are nearly all residents of the Southern District of Florida,

-10- (0024)

with the exception of Denise Franklin Monce Macha, who may be residing in Clearwater,Florida to the best of my recollection.

19. I will also need to call Mrs. Dorli Geertz to testify Regarding psychological tests which she administered on me over the Years between 1979-1990 which will establish my deteriorating state of mind during the time r was a devotee to and member of the Scientology cult . I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

20. Dr. Daniel M. Lipshutz, M.D. is a resident of Singer Island, Florida, and is my uncle. He is a retired psychiatrist formerly licensed to practice psychiatry in New York. He has been familiar with my psychiatric history during my entire lifetime arid will be called to testify about how the Scientology cult had adversely affected my thinking, belief system and my mental condition. I cannot afford to bring this witness to California in order to testify.

21. Mr. Samuel J. Kern, is a resident of Plantation, Florida, and is also my uncle. is a retired trial attorney from Brooklyn New York, and although cannot. represent me an counsel in this case because he is not admitted to the bar in Florida, he will assist me and act

-11- (0025)

as my personal representative if the trial were conducted in Florida. I cannot afford to bring my uncle to California in order for him to assist me in the preparation of my defense as my personal representative.

22. Consequently, and in the interest of justice, I plead with the Court to transfer the venue to the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 1404(a).

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Florida that the above is true and correct to

http://www.xs4aIl.nll-kspainklfishmanfdeclarat.html 18/0912003 • .. _ ....

the best of my recollection and understanding.

Executed March 1, 1993 at Dania, Florida.

(signed steven fishman) Dated: March 1 1993 Defendant Pro Se Register Number 17280-004 Dismas House -'. Room 324 141 N. W. 1st Avenue Dania, Florida 33004

-12- (0027)

top

http://www.xs4all.nV-kspaink/fishman/decIarat.html 18/09/2003 Scientologists loses copyright case By Jan Libbenga Posted: 08/09/2003 at 12:20 GMT

The Court of Appeal in The Hague last week rejected all of the Church of Scientology's claims its action against the Dutch Xs4all, writer Karin Spaink and ten other internet providers for publishing copyrighted material on the web .

." As a result, Spaink's website which Scientologists had sought to remove, is entirely legal.

The court also overturned two lower court rulings, one of which stated that linking to material that infringed a copyright was itself actionable. The victory for Xs4all represents a significant narrowing in the ability of copyright claimants to harass ISPs, observers believe.

The case started about nine years ago" when former Scientologist Steven Fishman was brought to court because he had committed several crimes in order to get the money to pay for his courses. When Fishman in Time magazine blamed the Church of Scientology for his crimes, the sect sued him for slander.

Fishman used several secret Scientoloqy documents to support claims that he had been brainwashed by the Church. As a result, these documerits became public material. The Fishman Affidavit has been travelling on the Net ever since. Karin Spaink was one of many to publish these secret scriptures as early as 1995.

·In September 1995 a bailiff raided the Amsterdam premises of provider Xs4all to seize materials of subscribers the Church of Scientology claimed to be violation of its copyright. The sect also initiated exhaustive judicial proceedings, but each time the court decided in favor of Spaink.

However, the decision of the Amsterdam District Court of June 1999 included a separate declaratory judgment stating that providers must take action if they are made aware of material on their servers that infringes upon a copyright if "the correctness of the notification of this fact cannot be reasonably doubted".

This judgment was reason for Xs4all"to initiate appeal proceedings of its own. In a press release Xs4all says that "Unless the criteria forremoving information from a site are clearly delineated, commercial.interests of providers may all too readily prevail over the protection of freedom opinion".

The decision of June 1999 also made reference to hyperlinks to copyrighted material. If a provider is aware of this, it must also

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32701.html 18/09/2003 take action against hyperlinks. But Xs4all believed that the court went too far with this. After all, a hyperlink is merely a road markeron the Internet, and can never be unlawfu', The Appellate Court has now set asidethis jUdgment the District Court in Amsterdam. ®

http://www.theregister.co.ukicontent/6/32701.html 18/09/2003 essays on scientology

home

index Operating Summary and Analysis latest Michael Robinson

search Introduction

In early August, 1995, an electronic version of the document known as the Fishman Declaration became widely available on the Internet. Because this court record contained information jealously guarded by Scientology(tm) organizations, it became the immediate focus of a great deal of interest and controversy.

This information consisted of course materials written by L.Ron Hubbard for a program to 'transform an individual into a Being with super-human powers, known as an Operating Thetan, or OT. A multitude of people have obtained copies of this material, because of the controversy it has engendered, arid the number of very important related issues that have been raised.

However, to a person who has not been trained in the communications technology of Scientology(tm), L. Ron Hubbard's style of writing may seem poorly structured, tedious, repetitive, and generally unpleasant to As a result, many persons who have obtained copies have found themselves unable to persevere through the entire material.

I have created this summary and analysis of the OT materials to aid precisely those persons who feel it is important to keep apprised of the issues in this controversy, but have found the OT materials themselves too burdensome. I have restructured much of the material for content, rather than process. I have eliminated a large amount of redundant and uninteres.ting material. And, finally, I have rewritten the material in a style which I hope is more conducive to casual reading.

My hope for this Summary and Analysis is that unindoctrinated readers will be able to get a grasp of all the salient content of the OT materials, and will thus be able to arrive at a more informed opinion of relevant controversies.

I welcome any comments or suggestions for future editions. I request that any excerpts of this work be attributed, and retain the copyright notlce. Thank you for your cooperation.

Operating Thetan Level One

The first level of the Operating Thetan series actually contains three separate exercises issued by L. Ron Hubbard at various times. Curiously, Level One appears to become less ambitious in scope over time.

http://www.xs4all.nll-kspaink/cos/essayslrobinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 The original Level One requires that one locate every overt and motivator lifetime for the previous 3000 years, as well as the "postulate" for each, with the use of an E-Meter. A detailed chart including dates, identities, etc. is plotted for the entire 3000 years.

The second version of Level One starts with the entire 15 steps of Route 1 from "Creation of Human Ability". After the entire lifetime is scanned out to a floating needle, the pre-OT practices creating and dissipating a reactive mind by use of the '''1 have mass".

The final version of Level One consists of nothing other than "running" the command "Spot a Person" until "cognition". This is to be done outdoors.

It is not clear what relation, if any, there is between the original and final version of Level One.

Operating Thetan Level Two

(A note is prepended indicating that Level Two is to be. performed in accordance with the instructions in the Clearing Course Instruction Booklet)

The purpose of Level Two is to run ten complete whole track tables, each containing a set of GPM (Goals Problems Mass). Each set is run separately.

The GPM found in each set are as follows: ELECTRICAL, TOCKY, BIG BEING, HOUSE, PSYCHO,BANKY, FORERUNNER, BASIC-BASIC, BASIC, THE COMMAND, LP, LP, and BODY GPM. In addition tothese GPM, there are a number of Implant Incidents which have no line plot, as follows: THE ARROW, DOUBLE ROD, WOMAN, WHITE BLACKSPHERE, HOT COLD, LAUGHTER CALM, and DANCE MOB.

The GPM in these "whole track tables" are supposedly the residual mass of incidents thathappened untold numbers of lifetimes ago to the individual's immortal "thetan". Approximate dates for each of the incidents are provided, although such as "about trillions 214th Power years ago" for the BASIC BASIC GPM, challenqe credulity regardless.

The version of Level Two reproduced in the Fishman Declaration is incomplete. A summary of the available GPM follows:

1. ELECTRICAL

The purpose of the ELECTRICAL GPM was to "CONVINCE a thetan he should think of himself as an electrical being". Thus, the end word of the permutation is not a word, but a shock. The permutation the ELECTRICAL GPM is as follows:

Create (shock) Destroy no (shock) Love Hate Be Disown

http://www.xs4all.nV-kspainklcos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 Use Condemn Seize Escape

2. TOCKY

In the TOCKY GPM, there is a swing of "Sun" from left to right which gives a read after each item. The permutation for the TOCKY GPM is as follows:

Create Sun Swing Abide no Sun Swing Enjoy Welcome Share Keep Hold Exploit Deplore Skip Continue Forget

Also included are the following two cryptic commands:

"That's what you get for making this Universe." "Get Out_If

No explanation given for what is "that", who exactly is "you", which universe is "this Universe", nor exactly "out" of what or where one is to get. Either it is expected that all these ambiguities will be clarified at the time one runs this GPM, or that the ambiguities are irrelevant, and it is sufficient simply to run the GPM without this information.

3. BIG BEING

The BIG BEING GPM is associated with the image of an explosion and the subsequent appearance of a BIG BEING (thus the name) in the sky.

The permutation for the BIG BEING GPM is as follows:

You Must I Survive I He Mustn't They Should We Shouldn't All Can Can't

This is followed by another explosion.

4. THE HOUSE

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink/cos/essays/robinson_sumrnary.html 18/09/2003 The only identification of this GPM is the possible appearance of a house or internal room.

5. - THE ARROW

In the space of l/lOth of a second, an image appears oftwo back-to back targets, front white, and the back black, with an arrow centered on each of the targets (the two arrows thus aimed at other).

6. WOMAN

The figure of a woman appears for a few hours. Nothing else.

7. WHITE BLACK SPHERE

An image of a sphere and a pole, black in front, white in back.

8. HOT COLD

FOr 1 1/8 seconds an image appears of a split pole, cold in front, hot in back.

9. LAUGHTER CALM

For 7 1/8ths of a second, in a cave, screams of very wild laughter come from the rear (then front) of a split pole, while calm ("a frozen numbness") comes from the front (then rear), giving a sensation of total disagreement.

"The trick is to conceive of both at the same time."

10. DANCE MOB

In the incident proper, one is stuck on a pole and trying to get off it. After this, a chanting mob dances around. The Pre-OT issupposed to get the phrases the mob chants while running this incident.

However, the duration is only 7/8ths of a second, so it is not clear how much of the chanting the Pre-OT will be able to "get".

11. DOUBLE ROD

A long shiny black rod moves from left to right, develops a split in the middle, becoming a white rod revolving forward and a black rod revolving backward. Both rods then disappear forward and up.

http://www.xs4all.nll-kspainklcos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 - ---

According to L. Ron Hubbard:

"There is a tremendous feeling of EXCITEMENT attached to this incident. It has a sort of feeling attached to it as if it was being squashed between the two revolving rods."

12. BASIC BASIC

This is actually a series of 5 GPM's consisting of explosions inside ones head, "where the Thetan is."

13. THE LOWER BANK

Contained in the lower bank are 48 pairs (of which 8 are found in the Fishman Declaration). All 48 affirmative items are first run, then the negative items, than each pair together. The pair schematic is as follows:

Affirmative: To build a ingness machine. Negative: Not to ---yourself.

The eight listed items are: postulate, think, ideanize (ideafyingness), reason, solve, order, space, and time.

Operating Thetan Level Three

Level Three is the most widely known of the Operating Thetan levels. The purpose of this level is to free the body of hundreds of body thetans by. clearing the "Xenu" implants.

75,000,000 ago, Xenu, the head of the then 20,000,000 million- year old Galactic Federation used renegades to remove "people" from the 76 planets of the Federation in order to alleviate overpopulation. These people were frozen, brought to Earth (then called Teegeeack), placed near volcanoes, exploded with H-bombs, subjected to 36 days of picture implants, and then transported to Hawaii or Las Palmas for packaging.

After events, officers loyal to the people waged a six-year campaign against Xenu, ultimately capturing and imprisoning him in "an electronic mountain trap," where remains. The Confederation, however, never recovered from the brutality of this conflict, and has since become a "desert."

According to L Ron Hubbard:

"Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants."

Furthermore, this implant was designed to kill ("by pneumonia, etc") persons attempting to solve it. However, L Ron Hubbard claimed his tech enabled a person to avoid this danger, and he became the first person in

http://www.xs4all.nll-kspaink/cos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 __ ------·c -- - -

75,000,000 years to obtain this information without dying.

According to L. Ron Hubbard:

"The pictures contain God, the Devil, angels, space opera, theaters, helicopters, a constant spinning, a spinning dancer, trains and various scenes very like modern England. You name it, it's- in this implant" Central to Level Three is the issue of body thetans. Body thetans are nothing more than normal disembodied thetans that stick to a human body in a cluster. The basis for a cluster is as follows: at some point any given thetan had an initial contact (collision, etc) with another thetan. The actual duration of contact was brief, but because of the trauma of contact and withdraw, a permanent picture of the contact is formed, thus leading 't het ans to a belief in permanent contact. Subsequent trauma can cause thetans to "cluster" together in an illusory permanent bond. As each thetan in a cluster is a full fledged thetan, and thus responds to normal auditing procedure, clusters may be disassembled one thetan at a time by running the initial "contact" picture, and clearing the belief in permanent contact.

Once a thetan has been freed from a cluster, it simply wanders off to start an independent existence as an ordinary thetan.

Which brings us back to the Xenu incident. Hundreds of billions of thetans were captured, frozen, shipped, exploded, implanted, transported, and boxed on Teegeeack 75,000,000 years ago. The trauma of this episode caused them to bond together in large clusters that are at this moment attached to every human on Earth (with the exception of those who have passed OT Ill). Each and every one of these hundreds of body thetans needs to be audited and "cleaned off" the human body because:

"Body thetans just hold one back."

However, the Xenu incident (Incident U) was not the first traumatic incident of this sort. earlier ("about 4 quadrillion years ago plus or minus") Incident I occurred to all thetans in the Universe. The details of this incident are rather sparse. L. Ron Hubbard describes it as follows:

LOUD SNAP WAVES OF LIGHT CHARIOT COMES OUT, TURNS RIGHT AND LEFT CHERUB COMES OUT BLOWS HORN, COMES CLOSE SHATTERING SERIES OF SNAPS CHERUB FADES BACK (RETREATS) BLACKNESS DUMPED ON THETAN

To get rid of a single thetan, the Pre-OT must locate it, isolate it, and run Incident I, InCident Il, and perhaps the original contact picture on it. This is a tedious and challenging task fraught with difficulties. Only those who have blown off sufficient charge in previous auditing have the awareness required to tease out and selectively audit individual thetans in a cluster. Even then, it's not easy. The overwhelming bulk of Level Three material is an extensive list of dffferent situations that can arise in auditing BT clusters, and directions for dealing with these situations.

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspainklcos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 The ultimate aim of this process is the ability to "accomplish full stable exteriorization" with full perception. As L. Ron Hubbard puts it:

"OT III is a vital grade. One fronts up to it and does it. he is really done, the rewards of OT III and IV exceed his wildest dreams."

Operating Thetan Level Four

The purpose of Level Four is to render a Being immune to further implantation. If a Being has no fear of future reimplantation, the result is "Certainty of Self as a Being".

The Pre-OT accomplishes this by systematically recreating ("mocking up") each implant previously dealt with in the entire Clearing Course, then ceasing the recreation, and blowing the charge associated with the mocked up implant. This exercise convinces the Pre-OT that they are at cause over, and can confront implants.

Prior to attesting to OT IV, however, the Pre-OT must add up and scan out all previous auditing (coming up with a total number of hours), and then "find and run a havingness process".

Operating Thetan Level Five

Level Five purports to allow one to "Gain Freedom from Fixated Introversion into MEST'. On this Level, the Pre-OT learns nothing less than the exact "truth about the Physical Universe, not the laws of physical scientists, but the basic considerations about Matter, Energy, Space and Time." The Pre-OT obtains the added bonus of becoming free of MESTlaws, as well as the encumbrance that "the mind and body" place on communication with the environment.

The first step of Level Five involves solo auditing (with eyes closed) commands the following permutation:

I Spot II a spot I in the room I two spots I in your body outside on the sun

Next, the folloWing steps are repeated "until major cognition, very good indicators or exteriorization occurs":

Spot an object in the room. Spot an object outside. Locate a moving object. Locate a spot in your body. Spot a motion. Locate a space. Spot a Thetan.

The final section consists of eight outdoor exercises, each done until cognition. For example:

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspaink/cos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 "1. The pre-OT is to put his attention on an object that. is ahead of him like a parked car, lamp post, etc. and walk towards it noticing the distance between him and it. He is to continue to do this until cognition."

and,

"2. Next the is to again pick out an object ahead of him and wrap in energy beam around it and himself and pull himself toward the object with shortening of the beam."

And that's all. At this point, the Pre-OT can attest to "Cause Over MEST" .

Operating Thetan Level Six

Level Six consists of a series of exercises which are ideally performed until the Pre-OT simultaneously achieves a floating needle, major cognition, and regained ability.

These exercises include, among others:

"Be Three feet in back of your head. Whatever you are looking at, copy it a dozen times, put it into you. Find the two back corners of the room and hold onto them without thinking for two minutes."

"Find two corners of the planet Earth, hold onto them for two minutes."

"Find a person in a distant land. Notice the time of day. Notice the terrain. Notice the general environment. Smell the air. Locate a thought that is his. Locate a thought that is yours."

"Create your body a feeling of calmness; create in your body sexual desire and turn it off. Continue that step until you feel you have control Over the 'sexual drives."

It is worth noting that one of the abilities to be regained in Level Six is the ability to travel at will in an exteriorized state, and see the sights and read the thoughts in another place. This ability would be extraordinarily useful in obtaining key intelligence information about criminal conspiracies, but curiously, there is no evidence that this ever actually occurs.

Operating Thetan Level Seven

The ,goal of Level Seven is the ability to "easily place an intention into or on a Being and/or a body." Level Seven is organized into seven sections which constitute a thorough rundown on "intention" related concepts.

The first section, "Basic Processes Set-up," covers the basics of intention, including a "very thorough" word-dear on "intention".

http://www.xs4all.nlf-kspainklcos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/0912003 Other items include:

What are you willing to cause? Decide something. What isn't a clear intention. Invent (mock-up) some intentions.

There are also numerous permutations of themes such as:

Tell me a thought/intention others would be willing to receive from others . What intention of yours has another not helped? What intention of others could you confront? What intention of yours could you be responsible for? Get the idea I cannot place an intention.

One of the more unusual commands in the first section is, "Give me an unknown datum." It is not clear whether or not this should be given the interpretation which leads to logical paradox.

Section two, "L&N Intention Process" requires an L&N on the item from the following list with the biggest read:

Has an intention been....

Suppressed Forgotten Invalidated Hidden Blunted Avoided Abandoned Altered Denied Twisted Enforced Changed Desired Completed Decided Made Wrong

Section three, "Placing thoughts and intentions" consists of a number of exercises, of the following is most salient:

Think a thought. Creatively place that thought in/on that (indicated object) . Now creatively get that (indicated object) thinking that thought. Creatively have that (indicated object) continue thinking that thought. Creatively have that (indicated object) cease thinking that though.

Section four, "Outside Processes with an auditor (objects)", involves exercises (conducted outside) to place thoughts and decisions into an object.

Section five, "Outside Processes with an Auditor (people)", involves exercises similar to section four, but with people, including:

Postulate perfection into that person. Tell me something you wouldn't mind that person about

http://www.xs4all.nll-kspaink/cos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 Section six, "Inside Processes solo", consists of a mix of exercises performed on an E-meter, such as:

What confusion could you create?

Mock-up your (father, wife, mother, husband). Mock him (her) up again. Dispose of these mock-ups.

How could another appreciate another as a human Being . .

The Pre-OT is then required to "Find and run a havingness process on yourself." .

Section seven, "Outside Processes solo", contains several exercises related to knowing about, intending, etc., random people (in a place with "lots of people"). The final exercises of this section (and, thus, of Level Seven) have become rather well known:

OT7-48 1. Find some plants, trees, etc., and communicate to them individually until you know they received your communication. . 2. to a zoo or a place with many types of life and communicate with each of them until you know the communication is received and, if possible, returned. OT7-49 Go out to a park, station or other busy area. Practice placing intention into individuals until you can successfully and easily place an intention into or on a Being and/or a body.

At th is point, the Pre-OT can attest to OT VII.

top

http://www.xs4all.nl/-kspainklcos/essays/robinson_summary.html 18/09/2003 Google Search: "Pierre Ccllignon'' Page 1 of 1e Htlp Groups Group•• for "PI.". ColIIgnQn" Rlllgloul • Whit 'I, • • Web •

From: Subjed: RPF Denmark (Ill): Cult accused of brainwashing Newsgroups: Date: 2001·07·3001 PST

Cult of unofficial

(Copenhaqen, 14.

German State ot punitive camp in Copenhaqen--but Danish do are for Lnt.ervenraon , . war between i s of reproaches the Danish police run

Scientoloqy's European members entire rules of movement. The have to a rehabilitation up years of for a token in the of

"This brainwashing we it from People held Will, until obey. It tter of tolerance doea of human She a in

Sclentology 10-15 people are the in but. accusations of coercion. to is voluntary only to membera corps·--the rehabilitation are movement of to during at the to own the the valid: not to They are not other They are not Thev are are to wear black Armband live Google Search: "Pierre Colllgnon' Page of3

Sc1entologists. are to run of achieve a in and the to be to or undergo of their free Several Scientoloqy on this, but also

ef evidence

to' speak to people to out why they -are it. of then He a at of Tho sccuaae cns coercion in in the but the of evidence. Today, are tc officlal Interpol. "In have an freedom nd we don't 90 just don't them," .det ect i ve of the

in the

A. the in a no than ••• the person in has been a on •• B. no C. Is t.o the at times. must by of D. Has right from Will of his and ne bonus. F. Only an area. which ia G. or people the RPF. the to The you stay in touch "a.s by o the RPF. ! . of J. of mess, is separate tram or other or events. L. use of canteen. M. have no and not .ee N. Wears on O. move and at the of not in in to perform unde r the a O. never the staff's or the public to endure extra for of to to or other otfences. s. own T. Hay not use er

not take alcohol or V. periodicals, or Search: "Pierre Collignon" of3

of or order to from the and program. not include

not or machinery. X. in the statf. Source: The set of is here vorsion.

... uoogJe "Pierre collignon" .. 1of7 e '( Goog. "Pierre colllgnon" group:altrellglor( Group. Search Dnly In .. arch for "Plem L. Rgn ° and I °www.freedomleaders.com Found., • • • • fot " ·Ir. • www.holidaycityscan.com From: Bid Re: RPF - Is it stiltgoing an? .Newsgroups: -, Date: 04:47:25 PST

Kreb,

the recant which I have below:

Offer Scientoloqyn translation

Jyllands-Posten (Copenhaqan, Denmarkl 2001 Scientology who offered The of isolation, hard strict control and a of the moat rights to

Previously you could running throu9h the of Copenhagen black boiler and boots. it caused too attention. merely are blue Scientoloqy very happy to people. arc of Scientology who bo on an even to Europe to be cleanup by of L Ran Hubbard, the early 19705. is Force" called - but you in the you can't find a of it. Tl\e of Scientoloqy doesn't find that to RPF, they would they tho and restrictions that to It. to of the plain

or the interior of warn to to the capital European In and indoct.rination under inhuman to

"Sclentoloqy darn not the RPF on the keopinq eye on it no of the so-called force,"

Crsula Caberta has Tecently published er.qui "1:1... n'J." aone by

.. ... 'Google Search: "Pierrecollignon" 2 of 7

thQ Canadian of Stephen Ront, on by of who have the RPF in Copenhagen or in centres in the or Guards

The all how they held wills in RPF. A few, Who were 1n the Scientolo9V in the desert, talk barbed •.,The and t o out hard labour. In addition to Lhey were to Sciantoloqy and they should their sins the tharoby worked the and OUt, any 'aga i ns t the leadership

is how professor Stephen Kent his the and in Europe. The that Stephen experiences of current of scientoloqy. He ,-onsidars that dare not critical about RPF- for of turn in thp. controversial from also be a ot .alt. undorlines another ot Lorns peoplo are under to why members af a cult. They want to divert and the theory brainwashinq It for having been Lorne Dawson writes a scientific article.

call cult but the is of faith in and in to you can only in context. Thetl, you re the of 1n the with the conditions o her on. you holy renounce not t.o Other. the around them to themselves to That's actually than the RPF •.. the a if to escape. The way of a head in Denmark. '

of their spare (and monoy) to take Scientology ccursea, The of where give to are 6000 of tho Sea They be recognised by blue live Scientoloqy work far a and lIIust vast numbor ef their It they tho rules, can go the can a been unfaithful ,t o Wife, he of the Scientology scriptures or simply that in position.

the RPF -If up, the chance to .•• first to do is sign and can any You couldn't it RPF if you didn't want to." for ! Europe. '1 - --_ .--- _--

Google Search: collignon 11 3 ol7

Some of sinners, however, offer of Offer,· that an offer they The is to be out of the SeA if you've 1n and world of tho organisAtion.

an of one two to but some on. Jyllands-Posten of • Swedish Sc1entologist who recently was thrown out of Sea Orqanisation after five in Ho didn't than - Sciontoloqy carry hours labour every day - 'most frequently renovation of tho bul1dinqs. Additionally, hours should be spent day studyinq roceiving and therapy. the it is that he can cleanse

"It I a wonderful poople are cleaner the the movement l $ live t.iqht on the RPF. Sciantoloqy recent of which are secrecy, and tough reading.

mean that in around and from the of the not even approach people. Scientology buildings supervision, cannot watch . sleep, and

critics, tha of rules to a which makes it po&siblo to a influence Sciencoloqy, On the ot.her count.ers the are there help the individual have been tiqhtened with a any connection with on the could be allowed to their ar

was moro for people to bo allowed to couple of per because would each other even It'. better to do without finish the fast.er,· Gaetene

cont:rol also seen

poople from street, no Ycu don't just pop and cup of fee. You gc you're supposed to qo, and you don't conscience peace -t he vecy

Some of the restrictions currous , people on the run than to do the as

in Scientolo9Y 'Google Search: ...

for certain build up extreme "There no religiou8 who look mildly on who the but we have time it if it happens in India or in other culture. for Bxampla, a Buddhist himself and all in an we think noble the in own culture, we of of rights," researcher intofeligions who books about

The is a - ' but how the RPF, he

you cons1der corpor have to that it a corporate culture you either or are people who of want to be of is oppressive And t o to anot.her. cult.ures which we says. Rothstein that must be -It's npor t ant to carry out a with an that. people aren't. to to' people the find do il. could be a of a deep it could also be of If of feel it be because there boen violations then in, n says Rothstein the of It howevert difficult been mistreated. In the oarly 1980s, in Copenhagen, and police to complain

This tho Harrinqtun explained had her, mentally tortured forced het to do absurd but physical Once, she to cloan a long corridor oc:caSlon, to '!wash i.e. outdoors Lhe and old 1n vats of ice-cold of through, she and them nto little balls were

Birqitta explained to the Coponhagen the police the The woman that had been forced oC . hadn't been up.

t.rUA I didn't around my but 1 up mentally, I still believed in the was to be t·hrown out of r ne

The federal police, FBI. of "slavery" and labour- Tho were of

------the Jlappy" ..

google I. _I: • & C= .. ._ ·o• " . _ • .• Google Search: collignon" of'

(Copenhagen, January 2001

in hard of for and a half--and he the thing to

been two he an Sc1entoloqy. was heh.d to boing Sea elite oC of he

didn't have think contribute to every day, here. would I OUl do Sell course I in the Sea the old the and European of in had been lonq he constantly conflict with his and trouble life. wife.

of "knowledge complained about his behaviour, faced the of and when didn't. finally to enter his to himsolf.

From July 1998 to 24th of lived as one of the marked inside Scientology. He was h1erarchyand he he had to a and clear But Stoeckl didn't mind . looked down on On the contrary, I respected everyone see that. I dealing

in Scientoloqy's hotel on vesterbro in Copenhagen, 19 RPFers were They .t o and eat canteen,but it. difficult to The at least 250 people, even if the dormitories on fourth couldn't avoid into ordinary of the talrcascs of hotel. really feel "I first and of we companionship, wore also ether peoplQ,"

of It pleasure and confidence, could the result of

source of tho problems

five months, transferred to centre in Anqeles, Here, he mainly carried aut included and - a where each toO on and

to find the of our to s tns t ha . more at confession in 'Google Search: "Pierre ... 60f1

Church. Hore the -priest your a - and than you're forgiven. t.he of the is forgotten. People it, bacause easy, it work. do continue to commit their says Stoeckl.

on the other hand, he thinks. a for spend tons of increasinq you'll be fired. have technoloqy in which a -double reward. The employee helped to handle and instead of firing the company - member ...

Franz most part of the thAt allowed qo through purpose rundown· you clear up lives, which have detrimental life. Tt several thousand

"In RPF YOU . get it free. This the. the on Eve last when fulfilled all the of ld folt

all qone now. I do belter at 1 find problems, and qetting on with I have more genuine for Stoeckl. Today he back his old position in Scientoloqy and he is his doesn't feel it a great sacrifice specifically ba his the 19 he a of he to "In big you on different ot tho world. I'm going on a to I qo, and 1 can't bring ",ire. part the he

Bid

Fri, Jul 2001

>1 have ques t Lon both the

thoy still co wear suits. on cLaan a unr i 1 r.o, e t c r > t he re wiLhin conf >roolll, anhor chain room, or cvan t rans i ccj.s >that connectinq rod, can >In

>Kreh >

> Ooogle "Pierre collignon" aroup:alt.reJigion.scicolOlolY.· ..• 7of?

Cl2003 GooDI. Ooogle Search: "Pierre Collignon" lof3

S Preferenc.. IC'"'"Pierre Collignon" Group. learch r••ult for ColUgnon" • • Rtflg(au. N.WI. •

•

From: .Subject: Inside RPF Oenmark(II}: Suaanne's nightmare Newsgroups: This article in this Date: 2001-07·3000:58:09 PST by Collignon, ancnymeus ICopenhaqen.

Susanne rhe Rrr control, felt Elleby joined Scientology, the Sea world "without war movement And love. The 20-year-cld the and she him and contract the Org order to be him. to et and she could become cont:rol of 1n a - she decided to to left. She of bill had for free while in Sea

For these she chase r c

On an to out and flirtinq in of was to the she Aoon be out - but wronq. Scientology did not Susanne felt lot from the on Copenhagen. She she to "crimes" • that 1 I crimes. went on like and I I felt I I In the end I I did told Susanne Susanna Elleby is of the all of her files out of - an lnna ......

http://groups.googie.calgroups?q=%22Pierre+Collignon%22&smn=20&hl=en&1r=&ie=UTF•... Google "Pierre'Collignon" PIle 2

time followed by ..flunk" or a Susanne would that had gone through "fantastic". There arc of well done· but from other of committed. thrown out t.ne or had a had grumpy - or the

followed tram that

accepted - e.g. -rounds". was a run up the the Headland. herself in friends lack at cleaning ef

told help in reality turned in because to in front of manaqement, system a around each you cannot do it further and that not be for yet. husband. her to yellow at the right to of they together but couple or . Susanne had to send wr.il;ten crcee t c

letter her Each tlme letter should enclosed to not allowed anyWhere alone. Once, the a about from her pOSt out had to the to

starved co

as Scientology pcomisedthem. Often had to do renovations or that to appOinted

their rehabilitation in but She given enouqh to eat "nd can be1nq too at r i ce was . by little She felt having to report on her the at night. He he in Susanne. "In the world of Scientology I thought it a ba doing, there no fer up suaannc punLsbed for the e r rme rr.ar.. She an ice .. On November 1st 1990 qOt books found in her bag. It two sonqbook from she s eout . neeauae sue she today. close companionshipf we were also constantly surrounded other people," he says.

consisted of painting and flooring. It gave him pleasure and confidence, Franz because he immediately could see the result of his efforts.

The source of problems

After five months, Franz Stoeckl transferred to centre in Angeles, USA, where approximately people on the Here, he mainly carried gardening work, and the programme also included reading and "auditing- - practice where Scientologists help each other to work on their personal and spiritual problems. "We had to find the source of our problems to ourselves from the sins of the It corresponds to confession, but the technology is more advanced than at a confession in the Catholic Church. Here the priest simply 'Remember your sins, say a prayer' - and then you're forgiven. You the of the and everything is forgotten. People it, so easy, it doesn't work. People do -continue to their Franz Stoeckl.

The RPF, on the other hand, very effective, thinks. you're a marketing manager for and spend several tens of millions of dollars without increasing Then, probably be fired. We have a technology in Scientology which gives a double reward. The employee helped to and of firinq the man, the company regains a valuable member of To Stoeckl, the important of he . allowed to through the "false purpose programme, where you clear up "false from earlier lives, said to have a detrimental effect on life. It a normally costs several thousand dollars.

Itln the RPF you get it for free. that the church in us," Franz. He finished the on Eve last year, when he had fulfilled all the requirements of the and he has felt a better person since.

liThe destructive barriers, which previously behaviour, all qone now. I -do better at work, I find more solutions than problems, and I'm getting on better with my I now have more genuine ,feelings for them," Franz Stoeekl. Today he is in his old position in in Copenhagen, and he together with wife again. Franz feel a great sacrifice specifically to be without --

18 he was in the a member of the Sea he live with separation.

"In any big you go on trips to different of the world. If I'm qoing on a to Japan, 1 have to and I can't bring my wife. It's of the game," he Google Search: "Pierre Collignon" Page 3 of)

But she had to get rid of the and of to to the it could her "penance" on Shortly to the - the

the sinful From then on Susanne a She to a in thl! alone on the and alone all on the other RPF' crs , them their fcod t:hem. . On 18th Susanne they could come and her. {allowing reAsons from net filled correctly. You do not the to your parents." few escape from but were mcstly who them to reeurn . reached it following their rules, a te She told come blow if Bet free once. xpelled

The threat the

one effort ",ith a written that disconnected {rom her she to see him until he res r s t ance "the church". Susanne do suitcase. susanne was the

One later he her a that time her husband been to the but. he would hear of a thinq leavinq aD they to divorced. Today Elleby herseLf ehe in and half years. 1n self They people who let others decide them. I 'Boo" to them, they qet she

hUp:lIgroups.google.ca/groups?q=%22Pierre+CoHignon%22&SUlJ1=20&hJ=en&1r=&ic=tJTF·... 8/26/03 "Franz the Happy" By Pierre Colliqnon, unofficial translation by Tingleff

Jyllands-Posten (Copenhagen, Denmark) January 14, 2001

He in the hard of RPF for year and a half--and says that it's thing that ever happened to him.

It been two years since he faced an ultimatum by Scientology. Franz Stoeckl told that he had to between being cleansed through the RPF pcogramme--or leaving the Sea Organisation, the of Scientology, of he had been a member 1980.

He didn't have to think twice. "I contribute to bettering mankind every day, here. What would I go out and do instead? Sell Of course I wanted to stay in the Sea Organisation," says the old German scientologist.

Franz Stoeckl was at the time-loqistics and of the European headquarters of Scientology in Copenhagen. work-results · had been deteriorating for a time, he was constantly in conflict. with his colleagues, and there trouble in his private life. Franz was seriously leaving wife.

Because of so-called reports" colleagues complained about his behaviour,rranzSt.oeckl faced che Lnte rnaI tribunal of Scientoloqy, and when solve the problems, he finally qat the offer to enter the RPF. This sa.lvacion, according to Franz Stoeckl himself.

. From July .1998 to the 24th December 1999 Franz Stoeckl lived as one of the marked inside Scientology. the ir. hierarchy and every he was addressed he to reply with a loud and clear Sir!"

But Franz Stoeckl didn't mind. "No one looked down on me. On the contrary, I was respected because everyone could see that I were dealing with my he

He lived initially in hotel Nordland on Vesterbro in Copenhagen, where 18 RPFers were assembled. had to keep to themselves and eat before the in the canteen, was difficult to maintain complete separation. The bUilding housed at least 250 people, and even if the had dormitories on the fourth floor, they avoid into ordinary members of Scientology in the narrow corridors and of the hotel. didn't feel isolated.

"1 was first and foremost a part of the RPF had S. " Pages County Courthouse

.. 11

I Some of 1,500 of who LA. Courthouse in an block access to docunents. 1985 WL 312270 Page 1

Band G (Minors) (Custody), Re (CA) Court ofAppeal c.1985

Where Reported

SummarY

Cited

History ofthe Case

Where Reported

[1985] Fam. Law 127

Summary

Subject: Family law

Keywords: Minors; Parents; Religions; Wardship

Catchphrases: Wardship; scientology movement; considerations; appeal

Abstract: The wards were a boy aged ten and a aged eight Their parents were scientologists. In 1979 a decree nisi was granted and, by consent, F was awarded custody of the children . In 1981 M and the stepfather resiled from scientology. In 1982, after a period of access, M kept the children and took them to the USA. F located her whereabouts and the children returned with F to England. In July 1984 the custody hearing before Latey, J. lasted for three weeks. M adduced substantial evidence basedon scientology's own documents and contended that if the children were brought up with F they would be seriously damaged. F submitted that the status quo offive-and-a-half years should remainundisturbed, He also sought to assure the judge that he would not involve the children in scientology until were old enough to decide for themselves. He did not adduce any general evidence on scientology nor did the "Church" take part in the proceedings. Thejudge found that scientologywas corrupt, sinister and dangerous. He refused to accept F's assurances and held that it was not in the children's best interests to be exposed to scientology and that this fact tipped the scales in favour of M having care and control. F appealed contending inter alia, that the judge had failed to exercise his discretion judicially in that his judgment had been coloured by his strong feelings and preoccupation with scientology and that it was a breach of natural justice to ' m ake such definite finding on scientology when the "church" had notbeen party to those proceedings. The refused to allow an application by the "church" to be joined and a party to the appeal. Summary: Held, dismissing F's appeal that by reason ofthe nature ofthe proceedings it was in the interests ofthe children that the judge should not only hear evidence about scientology but should also make definitive findings upon otherwise he could not assess the risk to the children if they continued to be in contact with F. In any event no application had been made for the "church" to be joined as a party and there had been no-appeal against the Registrar's refusal. The judge's findings about scientology were binding only between the parties in the case and formed no precedent and created no estoppel in any other proceedings involving different persons and different issues. There was also ample evidence on which the judge had been entitled to take the view that he could not rely on F to fulfil his assurances. There were no grounds for interfering with the judgment (Official Solicitor v K [1965] A.C. 201 applied).

Copr. West 2003 No Claim to Orig. GOYl Works 1985 WL 312270 Page 2

Cases Cited

Official Solicitor v K, [19651 A.C. 201; [I963] 3 W.L.R. 408; [l963] 3 All E.R. 191; (I 963) 107 SJ. 616 (HL)

History ofthe Case

Direct History

Band G (Minors) (Custody), Re, [1985] Fam. Law 58

Affirmed by

-->B and G (Minors) (Custody), Re, [l985] Fam. Law 127 (CA)

END OF DOCUMENT

Copr. West 2003 No to Orig. Govt. Works Scientology •• Is this a Religion?

Stephen A Kent University of Alberta, Edmonton/Alberta, Canada Department of Sociology eM'ail: [email protected] Abstract Although some social scientists insist that Scientology is a religion, the more appropriate position to take is that the organization is a multi-faceted transnational corporation that has religion as only one of its many components. Other components include political aspirations, business ventures, cultural productions, pseudo-medical practices, pseudo-psychiatric claims, and (among its most devoted members who have joined the Sea Organization), an alternative family structure. Sea Organization's job demands appear to allow little time for quality child rearing. Most disturbing, however, about Sea Organization life is that members can be subject to extremely severe and intrusive punishments through security checks, internal hearings called "Committees of Evidence," and a forced labour and re-indoctrination program known as the Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF) and its harshest companion,"the RPF's RPF. Taken together, these harsh and intrusive punishments likely violate a number of human rights clauses as outlined by two United Nations statements. This is a revised and corrected version of a shorter presentation given at the 27th Deutscher Evangelischer Kirchentag, June 20, 1997, Leipzig, Germany)

• 1) Introduction • 2) Is Scientology a Religion? • 3) Scientology asa Multi-Faceted Transnational o 3.1) Politics o 3.2) Business o 3.3) Cultural o 3.4) Pseudo-Medicine o 3.5) Pseudo-Psychiatry o 3.6 Scientolo as an Alternative Famil Structure • 4) The Rehabi itation Project Force -- Forced Labour and Reindoctrination • 5) The RPF's RPF • 6) Brainwashing • 7) Scientology and Probable Human Rights Abuses • Bibliography

1) Introduction Rarely, if ever, in the post-war period have diplomats from the superpowers troubled themselves over questions about the alleged religious nature of a transnational organization. Consequently, the recent debate between Germany and theUnited States over the alleged religious nature of Scientology is remarkable. The fact that German officials, institutions, and citizens are seeking additional information about this organization is understandable, and perhaps this article will provide additional insights that may help to clarify the issues in this debate. For the record, I did not have any contact with German parliamentary officials before I prepared this article, which I originally presented a talk in a session of the 1997 Deutscher Evangelischer Kirchentag. While in Canada and writing the talk, I spoke by telephone for about ten minutes with one German professor who was involved with the German government investigation (called the Enquete Commission), but we only touched briefly on issues related to Scientoloqy, The German Kirchentag [a bi-annual, week long, Lutheran Church event] paid my air fare and my hotel in Leipzig, and Berliner Dialog[a 'counter-cult' Christian-based maqazinelcovered some of my expenses, but no person or institution paid me a fee or honorarium. I prepared my talk while in Canada, and did not consult with anyone in Germany or elsewhere about its content. I had complete freedom to write whatever I wanted around the general topic of the debate about Scientology's religious claims. As a person trained in religious studies; I find the debate about Scientology's alleged religious nature to be an interesting and important one. It should not be, however, the only issue over which we evaluate the German-American debate over Scientolbgy's religious claims. g:ious question are human rights questions. Some people assume that religious practice is a=guaranteed human : right, but even a superficial : examination of events shows that many atrocities occur in the name of God or religion. . Universally, therefore, religious beliefmust receive absolute protection,- but religious practice from that beliefmust receive protection only until it begins to violate the rights of its members nonmembers. Following this last point, I argue that even if Scientology contains a theology , cosmology that some members interpret religiously, its organizational and behaviours raise serious human rights questions. Without wanting to . review the pronouncements from all German officials about the organization, I -conclude that the German government had good reason to investigate Scientology's activities in its country. It also had compelling reasons to inquire about the well-being of German citizens in Scientology facilities in the United States and elsewhere. I will share just a few of the documents that fed me to these conclusions, and some of them are available in numerous world wide web sites on the Internet. While I am aware of the historical and cultural context in which the debate about Scientology in Germany is occurring (see Hexham and Poewe, 1999), I remain convinced German officials and others based their concerns about the organization primarily upon-analyses of the organization's stated policies and sanctioned practices (including many of the ones that I am about to discuss). PAG£2 2) Is Scientology a For a number of my social scientific colleagues around the world, the between Germany and the U.S. revolved around the question of Scientology's .religious claims. Many of my social scientific colleagues had examined some Scientology documents and possibly participated in someScientology events. and deduced that the organization is religious in Bryan R. Wilson (b. 1926), who is of religion, concluded "that Scientology indeed beregarded as a religion" (Wilson, 1990: 288). He reached this conclusion after comparing Scientology's belief system with twenty characteristics usually found within what he called "known religions" (Wilson, 1990: 279). Significantly for the current debate in this country, he dismissed historical information from the early 1950s about Dianetics presenting itself as "a mental therapy and Scientology a science." Specifically with these early self-representations in mind, Wilson insisted that "even if it could be conclusively shown that Scientology took the title of 'church' specifically to secure at law as a religion, that would say nothing about the status of the belief-system, and it is with the belief system that we are specifically concerned" (Wilson, 1990: 282-283).[1]

1)Note: - UndOUbtedlybecause of this interpretation, Wilson become a champion of Scientology's religious claims (see also Wilson, n.d.: 35) and the organization alludes to him ("[t]he foremost sociologist in the world") as an academic who concluded "that Scientology was setting the trend for the 21st century for all religions as it offers solutions for people's problems inthe real world" (International Association of Scientologists, 1995: [10]). Scientology also employs his opinion in arguing before an American court that the organization has the right to keep secret its upper level materials (Wilson, 1994: 11). .

In fact, I have made precisely the argument that Wilson dismisses. In a study that ]Berliner Dialog (Heft 1-97) translated into German, and in another study that I hope to publish soon, I show that L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology's founder)-c1aimed that Scientology was a religion because he saw the claim as a marketing device to make money and aVOId taxes (Kent, 1997b: 25ff; Miller, 1987: 199-203,220) as well as a way "to reduce the likelihood of governmental interventions against it for allegedly practising medicine without a license" (Kent, 1996: 30). Moreover, denies its reQutedly nature if it is attempting a country that might adversely to-religious proselytization (such as Japan or Greece 18-19]). Nevertheless, the historical reasons behind Scientology's religious claims, as well as the organization's selectivity in making the claims, do not diminish the probability that many Scientologists view their commitment as a religious one. From a social scientific perspective, and probablyfrom a legal one as well, the objective "truth" of an ideology is not the determinantof a group's "religious" designation. Mere belief in supernatural beings or forces may be enough to get an ideologydesignated as religious, even if the origins or doctrines of the belief system are highly suspect. Along these lines, the inspirational figure in the sociologyof religion, Max Weber, refused to exclude charlatans from his identification of charismatic figures, since the devotion offollowers was a far more salient fact than authenticity. After mentioning two types of charismatic figures, added that type is represented by [the founder of a major faith], who may have been a very sophisticated swindler (although this cannot be definitely established)" (Weber, 1968: 242). Similarly, from a social scientific perspective, a belief system is religious if it contains supposedly supernatural elements, regardless of the accuracy of those elements. Perhaps unlike the religious founder whom Weber named, Hubbard's sophisticated swindle has been exposed bya number of researchers (for have shown that his religious alignment was purely expedient. Now, however, many of his followers their lives in the context of the doctrines that he developed. PAG£3 3) Scientology as a Multi-Faceted Transnational Even if we grant the point that Scientology cosmology and soteriology have supernatural elements that classify the belief-system as religious (regardless these elements' suspect history), neither government officials nor-society at large should necessarily grant Scientology religious status for purposes of receiving societal benefits. Rather than struggling over whether or not to label Scientology as a religion, I find it far helpful to view it as a multifaceted transnational corporation', only one element of is religious. Coinciding with supernatural claims are equally important secular dimensions relating to political aspirations, business operations, cultural productions, pseudo-medical practice, pseudo-psychiatric practice, social services (some of which are of dubious quality), and alternative family structures. A few examples of each'dirnension will suffice, but countless examples of each one exist throughout both Scientology's literature and the social behaviour of its members ..Ihe most salient aspect of however, is the totalitarian, some would say fascistic, use of power that holds the organization I will speak about some of these totalitarian uses of power, and in doing so it will be very clear that the German government took the only appropriate avenue open to it. 3.1) Politics Scientology's political aspirations have surfaced at various times throughout its nearly fifty year history, with the organization involving itself politicians or political structures in Rhodesia (in 1966), Greece (in 1968 to 1969), Morocco (in 1972), and in the Russian city of Perm (where it was training city officials in Hubbard Management ideology). Observers wondered about the fate of Scientology training to Albanian government officials after the recent popular uprisings and social collapse in the late 1990s (see Kent, 1997a: 17-18). 3.2) Business At times related to its political aspirations (as in Perm) are Scientology's programs designed to train business executives and professionals, often specifically targeting personnel in medically related areas. Through an organization named WISE (World Institute of Scientology Enterprises), Scieotology offers a business consultancy and management program. A recent publication claims that "WISE [m]embers form a network of highly trained consultants in Hubbard Management Technology who can provide you with tailor-made training programs to suit your company's needs" (WISE International, 1994b). WISE programs target various clients throughnumerou5 companies, and in Germany and other parts of Europe the best known WISE company is U-Man (see, for example, WISE lnternational, 1994a).·For all purposes, this dimension of Scientology is of how organization portrays Cultural _, . Culturally, Scientology hasaneritire industry devoted to the production and dissemination of Hubbard's writings and ideological material to both members arid outsiders. The Scientology owned andoperated (and now tax exempt) Bridge .Publications, for example, produced a volume solely dedicated to The Fiction ofL. Ron Hubbard (Widder, 1994), which discusses his writings of Westerns, adventure stories, mystery and detective stories, romance, fantasy, science fiction, plays, and screenplays (among others), and makes little if any mention of his supposedly "religious" writings. The actor and Scientology public relations officer, John Travolta (Anderson, 1980: 3; Church of Scientology International, 1994). is working on a movie version of Hubbard's science fiction work, BattlefieldEarth, while a team of Hollywood producers is developing a film version of the Hubbard pulp novel, To the Stars (Reuters, 1997). · . As these current film productions suggest, Scientology is.eager to be involved with projects that disseminate its ideology to nonmembers through high profile cultural undertakings. One vital aspect of this dissemination effort cultivating the conversion and support of society's cultural celebrities. Beginning in 1955, Hubbard's "Project Celebrity" targeted.what he called "prime communicators" with the hope that they would "mention" Scientology and again" ([Hubbard],1955). By 1992, thirteen "celebrity centres" existed around the world (Church of Scientology International, 1992: 353), and their purpose was "[t]o fully utilize opinion leaders and Scientologists to permeate society get all the different publics utilizing LRH's Technology in every aspecL." (Jentzschand Foster, 1977: This orqanizatiorial .pushto get everyone using Hubbard's so-called technology has dramatic secular implications for such issues of how to organize an office,how to generate and

I handle money, and how to measure office growth. It presumably also may have implications for people's supernatural belief systems, but it is understandable that critics see Scientology celebrities as participating in the dissemination of secular Scientology goals. In addition to free publicity for Scientology, celebrities also give large financial contributions back to the organization. Had Scientologist Chick Corea,for example, received money from the Baden-Wurttemberg state culture ministry for performing at state-sponsored events, then some of that income may have become part of his contributions to the International Association of Scientologists. The avowed purpose of this organization is "[t]o unite, advance, support and protect the Scientology religion and Scientologists in all parts of the world, so as to achieve the Aims of Scientology as originated by L.Ron Hubbard" (lnternationat Association of Scientologists, 1995: [back cover]). In one of the Association's 1995 magazines, both he and actress' KirstieAlley each appeared as having contributed (US) $100,000 (Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International, 1995: 8; International Association of Scientologists Administration, 1995: 49, see 60). By comparison, the $2,000 contribution that John Travolta made seems (Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International, 1996: 8; see International Association of Scientologists Administration, 1995: 60). What Germans know, however, is that this organization provided grants to the Church of Scientology International in order to fund the series of anti-Germany ads in the New York Times and the Washington Posf(both beginning, I believe, on September 15, 1994). Utilizing cultural productions and prominent cultural figures, therefore, to disseminate all aspects of Hubbard's so-called tech is an intimate aspect of the organization's overall public relations and (it would seem) financial strategies. PAGE4 3.4) Pseudo-Medicine A glimpse into Scientology's pseudo-medical practices - in this case one that also relates to a social service effort of dubious effectiveness - is its Narconon program. This program purports to rid the body of drug and radiation resldues, and a 1996 Scientology publication told a story about an American Gulf War veteran suffering from Gulf War Syndrome who "arrived to do the detoxification program ..: complain[ing] of disorientation, dizziness, memory loss and muscle and joint pain. He finished the program and has no more dizziness, memory loss OR muscle and joint pain - ALL his symptoms have been handled TOTALLY" (Church of Scientology International, 1996: 68 [original emphasis]). Recently Scientologists applied the Narconon program to children suffering from radiation-related illnesses in Chernobyl (Bev, 1997). Regardless of how Scientology portrays these claims, they are medical ones that purport to offer a social service, but one about which experts remain highly critical. In the American state of Oklahoma, for example, a 1991 mental health'board examined a Narconon program and concluded that "there is substantial credible evidence, as found by the Board, that the Narconon Program is unsafe and ineffective" (Mental Health Board, 1991; reproduced in Lobsinger, 1991: 58). 3.5) Pseudo-Psychiatry Another dimension of pseudo-medical claims are pseudo-psychiatric ones. Scientology's hatred of psychiatry is worthy of a study in itself, and some of its own documents very clearly indicate Scientology's primary social purpose is the destruction of psychiatry and replacement with Scientology techniques. In, for example, a confidential document written for Scientology's intelligence branch (then known as the Guardian Office), the unidentified author, who most certainly was Hubbard himself, had a section entitled ''The War." The text in this section stated thaf "[o]urwar has been forced to become 'To take over absolutely the field of mental healing on this planet in all forms.'" The next sentences have significant implications for the current religious debate: ''That was not the original purpose. The original purpose was to clear Earth. The battles suffered developed the data that we had an enemy who would have to be gotten out of the way and this meant we were at war" ([Hubbard], 1969: [5]). The central target in Scientology's efforts to "take over the field of mental healing" is psychiatry. Indeed, several Scientology organizations, including the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, the International Association of Scientologists, and Freedom magazine are working diligently in attempting to achieve the.goal of "Eradicating Psychiatry" (Weiland, 1990: 21). One aspect of Scientoloqy's efforts to eradicate psychiatry and replace it with its own techniques is that members can take a (called a rundown) that claims to teach members how to cure psychosis. Called the "Introspection Rundown Auditor Course," this course supposedly "factually handles the last of the 'unsolvable' conditions which can trap a person - the psychotic break. And end forever the 'reason' psychs were kept around with their icepicks and shock machines" (Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, 1992: [2]). This course is based upon what Hubbard described as "a technical breakthroughwhichpossibly ranks with the major discoveries of the Twentieth Century." The consequence of this alleged breakthrough was "THIS MEANS THE LAST REASON TO HAVE PSYCHIATRY AROUND IS GONE" (Hubbard, 1974: 346). self-proclaimed "breakthrough" involved isolating the person having the psychotic breakdown while not speaking to the " giving the person particular vitamins and minerals, determining what triggered the illness, then putting person through a long and complex== series of Scient010gy "counselling" sessions (called auditing) that focus on the incident Hubbard, 1974: 353). Currently this course is at the centre of controversy involving the December 5, 1995 death of Scientologist Usa McPhersbn in Clearwater, Florida. After a minor car accident, McPhersonexhibited bizarre behaviour -- publicly .

speaking in mo-notone with a fixed stare, exhibiting forgetfulness and confusion, and crying. Against medical advice, she signed herself out of a hospital and into the care of visiting Scientology "friends" who took her to the organization's Fort Harrison Hotel. Seventeen days later, Scientologists took her back to a distant hospital where a doctor was working who was a Scientologist, and he pronounced her dead. A State Attorney felony charges [unauthorized medicine and abuse neglect of a disabled adult) against a Scientologyorganization as a . the death (Circuit Court..., 1998), and McPherson's estate launched a lawsuit that accused Scientology "of allowing McPherson to languish in a coma without nutrition and liquidswhile she was in isolation as part of an Introspection Rundown" (Tobin, 1997: 12A). In this context, a Scientology lawyer acknowledged "that the Introspection Rundownremains 'part of church services'" (Tobin, 1997: 12A). Undoubtedly, therefore, Scientology practices pseudo-psychiatry, and the lawsuit over McPherson's death may establish __ o_f .,ti_ __n.;ti consequences. PAGE 5 3.6) Scientology as an Alternative Family Structure

Finally, Scientology is an alternative family structure, at least as it is lived by its most devoted followers who are members of a Scientology organization called Sea Org[anization]. Scientology portrays the Org as "a fraternal organization existing within the formalized structure of the Churches of Scientology. It consists of highly dedicated members of the Church [who] take vows of service" (Church of Scientology of California, 1978: 205). (The organization downplays the fact that these people sign year contracts.) Many indicators point to the fact that Scientology structures the Sea Org in a manner that damages parent-child relations if not the well-being of children in general. In essence, Org becomes one's new family, often at the expense of spouses and children. Indication of organizationally influenced damage caused by Sea Org parents to their children formed the basis of a critical article that appeared in a major newspaper of the Florida city near to where the Scientology organization called Flag is based. In November, 1991, the St. Petersburg Times ran a long article entitled, "Scientology's Children," and it contained an excerpt about a German mother and her son:

• Eva Kleinberg moved from Germany to Clearwater with her 9-year old son, Mark, in 1986. She had joined a group of Scientology staff members called the 'Sea Org.' • Eva was told she would have two hours a day for family time. But with her travel time from work, she said she actually had only one hour with her son. Because of the 12-hour workdays, she couldn't always stay awake for the full hour. • 'I would compromise with my son,' she said. After eating, she and her son would divide the remaining half-hour of their family time. 'I would play a game with him for 15 minutes, and I would go to lay down for 15 minutes and sleep.' . • While Eva worked, cleaned up around the motel or played with friends. • About a year later, Eva and Mark left the church. • Asked what he thinks ofScientology, Mark, now 14, said, 'I don't think good 'cause the people... they don't get to spend time with their family and it's real expensive.' • Church spokesman Richard Haworth said staff Scientologists actually spend three or four hours a day with their children, which he said is more than the average family (Krueger, 1991: 12A).

I believe the Kleinbergs' account rather than the one by the Scientology spokesperson because I had heardthe same scenario (about parents having little time to spend with children) during an interview with former Sea Org member that I conducted in December, 1987. At Flag in Florida during the late 1970s and early 1980s, infants apparently in Scientology-run nursery during the day when parents worked, and usually parents would return from work at about 6:00 in the evening and spend about an hour-and-a-half with their children before taking them back to the nursery at 7:30 for bed. Parents then caught a bus back to the Sea and finally did not leave for the night until 10:30 or later. My informant told me in the morning, they would pick up their children from the nursery, have them dressed and in dining room by 7:30 AM, drop back at the nursery, and be on the bus going to work by ten minutes past 8. This former member added, however, that "there'd be some people who had kids who didn't go home for two or three days in a row. They'd be working all night"(Kent interview with Fern, 1987: 44, see 43). The Kleinbergs' account about limited family time also rings true because of a series of internal memos (of which I have copies) from Scientology's Pacific Area Command (in Los Angeles, California) beginning in early November, 1989. These memos centre around an Executive Directive that the commanding officer issued which abolished the one hournightly family time. He cited two reasons for doing so. First, he claimed, "[a] thorough research [sic] revealed that there is no LRH [L. Ron Hubbard] reference covering Sea Org members taking 1 hour family time per day. Also to have such break in schedules in the middle of production has been found to be detrimental to production...." Instead he wanted people to work the extra hour a day in order to build up their production output so that they would receive a "liberty day" (Gouessan, 1989) once every two weeks (Shapiro, 1989). Several parents objected, and their objections were revealing. One person asked rhetorically, "[h]ow can one keep track of one's child without even an hour a day with the child? I HAVE seen staff distracted NOT caring for their children and this time could be well utilized for this" (Swartz, 1989). Another person cited the text of a Hubbard tape where Scientology's founder complained 'about a condition that he had seen (and which he said had existed in the Pacific Area Command): "I wish somebody would tell me why we. consistently had to parents to see their children when they hadn't seen them for weeks" (Hubbard, Transcript of LRH Taped Briefing to CS-& and Pers Comm 22 Sept 73; attached to Shapiro, 1989). This same person acknowledged in his letter of protestthat "[i]n the 19 years I have been in the Sea Org in PAC this condition (parental neglect, etc.) has several times been the source of major upset and enturbulation [agitation] on Church lines" (Shapiro, 1989 [round brackets in original]). Taken together, the interview material, media accounts, internal policy directive, and responses point to the fact that parents' time with their children is severely constrained and sometimes eliminated because of the organizational pressure and job demands under which Sea Org members work. It seems that Scientology, its Org manifestation, becomes something akin to an alternative or "fictive" family structure to itsmembers (see Cartwright and Kent, 1992: 348 349), receiving more time and commitment than their own children. PAGE 6 On a related point, the new Sea Org family to which adults devote their lives may at times place children in medically detrimental situations. This fictive family may not always be a medically responsible one. The informant whom I interviewed in 1978, for example, complained to me that "the nursery conditions were terrible." She related that, in one nursery room, "there were, I think, sixteen babies in the room, all under a year old, and throughout the whole day, there were three nannies who did shifts in that room, looking after sixteen babies all under a year old" (Kent interview with Fern, 1987: 48). Under these conditions, children developed medical problems (according to my informant,.Fern), because the facility did not have an isolation nursery. Consequently, common childhood illnesses (such as ear spread rapidly among the children and remained in the nursery population for a long time. To support her assertion, this informant showed me medical records that she kept of her child's visits to doctors while the child was under nursery care, and compared them with similar records from after the time that she and her child left Sea Org and the nursery arrangement. The child made seventeen visits to the doctor's office during an eight period while in the nursery, then only four visits in the twenty-nine months following the family's departure from the organization (KenUn.terview with Fern, 1987: 49-50). Researchers always must be cautious in accepting as fact the account of a ." single person, but I heard similar stories about the condition of children's facilities in Scientology's child program on the other side of the American continent -- Los Angeles, California. The person who related the account had occasion to visit the children's facility (called the Cadet Org) in the late 1970s or early 1980s, and she saw an infant who was the child of a man she knew. This child, she stated: was very, very ill and she was laying in a urine soaked crib and she was she just had her diaper on.... She had lots of, like, little fruit flies and gnats on her body and she had been so ill thatshe had tremendous amounts of mucous plugging her nose and her eyes were, like, welded shut with mucous and I, I just snapped in my head (Kent Interview with Pat, 1997: 34). After this incident of allegedly witnessing severe child neglect, the person began plotting how she leave the organization. The final example of alleged child neglect is documented in a report filed by the commanding officer of the Cadet Estates Organization in late October, 1989, concerning the hygiene of three children -- ages 4, 8, and 10 or 11. Two of the children had lice, and forone of them it was a recurring problem. A guardian was in charge of them, but she "is herself on mission quite often." [That is to say, the organization frequently sent her away on assiqnrnents.] The report continued by stating that, "[w]hile the guardian was on a mission, the kids were picked up at night by another staff member that [sic: who] lives next door, and the little one would be brought in in the morning while the other two older once [sic: ones]would walk to the Cadet Org by themself [sic}. The children would dress themself [sic] and we have no who does the laundry or room hygiene for the children" (Gabriele, 1989: 1). We must be careful when interpreting this data on possible child neglect or endangerment, since none of it is current. Sufficient indicators exist, however, that investigative officials in the United States and elsewhere should examine Scientology's treatment of Sea Org children. Because the attitude among some Sea Org leadership appears to be that children hinder adults from performing their vital assignments, researchers should not be surprised to learn of pressures that Sea Org women felt to either abort pregnancies or give-up children for adoption. My 1987 informant told me that when Sea Orqoperated on ships during the mid 1970s, women knew that they were not allowed to raise children on the vessels. Consequently, they experienced pressure to have abortions. She told me that, "on the ship, I know of a lot of people that [sic: who] had abortions, because they didn't want to leave the ship. It wasn't like anybody said 'You have got to get an abortion.' It was more an implied thing. you don't you're going to leavev(Kent interview with Fern, 1989: 41-42). Years later I saw the same pressures described in a 1994 legal declaration by Mary Tabayoyon, who became a Scientologist in 1967, joined Sea Org in 1971, and stayed in it until her departure in 1992. She stated that in 1986, while on the Scientology base in Hemel, California, "members of the Sea Org were forbidden to have any more children if they were to stay on post[,] andthe Hubbard technology was applied to coercively persuade us to have abortions so that we could remain on post" (M. Tabayoyon, 1994: 2). The pressure partly through what Scientology called "ethics handling," which involved the organization pressing people to conform to Hubbard's policies and the organization's directives. Tabayoyon herself "gave up my child due to my greatly misguided obligation and dedication to the Sea Org" (M. Tabayoyon, 1994: 4). She relinquished her child after being "indoctrinated to believe that I should never put my own personal desires ahead of the accomplishment of the purpose of the Sea Org" (M. Tabayoyon, 1994: 5). Taken together, the interviews, legal declarations, media accounts, and internal documents present troubling glimpses into the lives of Scientology's most committed members. Sea Org obligations override many personal and family obligations and responsibilities, and devotion to the Scientology cause often appears to take priority over the needs of children. Equally disturbing, however, are accounts that some older children and teenagers have had to endure, along with Sea Org adults, the abuses of Scientology's forced labour and reindoctrination programs. Although several labour and intensive instruction programs have operated within the Scientology organization over the years, among the most intense ones is the Rehabilitation Project Force - usually just called the RPF.

4) The Rehabilitation Project Force - Forced Labour and ·Re-indoctrination When Sea Orqrnernbers cornmitwhat the organization considers to be serious deviations (such as dramatic E-meter readings, unsatisfactoryjob performance, or job disruption [including challenges to senior officials]), then they likely wind up the RPF. Even discussing the policies and techniques that Hubbard wrote by using ideas .other than his own was called "verbal tech" and apparently was a punishable act (see Hubbard, 1976: 546). Begun in early 1974 while Hubbard and his crew still were at sea, it now operates in several locations around the world. Currently RPFs are running at the Cedars of Lebanon building in Los Angeles; on Scientology property near Hemet, California; in the facilities in Clearwater, Florida; in the British at East Grinstead, Sussex; and in Copenhagen, Denmark. I cannot confirm the of RPFs in several other locations. In phrase, the RPF program places Scientology's most committed members in forced labour and re-indoctrination programs. The operation of these programs raises serious human rights questions, and their continuation reflects badly on nations that allow them to operate unchecked. Particular blame must be placed on American state and federal authorities, since at least three RPF programs have operated for years on American soil. Moreover, the American Internal Revenue Service granted Scientology tax exemption despite what almost certainly are illegal conditions under which RPF inmates must work, study, and live. Extensive material about RPFs in the United States has existed for years in various court cases, and now most of this information is readily available on the World Wide Web. German government officials know about the RPF, and almost certainly this knowledge played a major role in the government's continued opposition to Scientology organization. Getting assigned to the RPF is a traumatic event for most people. Procedurally, what is supposed,to happen is that leaders call a hearing, known as a "Committee of Evidence," to evaluate a person's performance or attitude. A former member described this body as "a Scientology trial, where the Committee [members] act as prosecutors, judges and jury rolled into one" (Atack, 1990: 306). Committees sometimes obtain evidence against the person from security checks (called sec checks [see Kent interview with Young, 1994: 49]), which the organization portrays as "Integrity Processing" or "Confessional Auditing," but which is really a form of interrogation (Atack, 1990: 147). In fact, in 1960, Hubbard wrote a policy called "Interrogation" about how to use the device known as an·E-meter as an interrogation device rather than merely as a spiritual aide in counselling or auditing. sessions the organization represents it to the outside world (Hubbard, 1960). Hubbard had used security checks on his followers since 1959, but the most notorious sec checkprobably was the "Johannesburg Security Check," published April 7, 1961. consisted of over one hundred questions, almost all .... of which inquire about previous or current - deviant and-criminal acts including spying, kidnapping, murder, drugs, sex, and Communism. The most revealing ones, however, involved people's thoughts about Hubbard (called by his initials, LRH) and his wife, Mary Sue Hubbard. The sec check specifically asked, "Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about LRH?," and "Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about Mary Sue?" Not only, therefore, were people forced to reveal personal information about serious transgressions, but also they were forced to reveal the existence of any negative thoughts about the leader or his wife. One former member-turned critic, Robert Vaughn Young, reported that he was sec-checked for several hours a day for about two weeks (Kent Interview with Young, 1994: 50). An even more severe form of sec check was the "gang bang sec check," a process that presumably takes its name from group rape (a slang term for which is gang bang). Gang bang sec checks involve two or more interrogators rapidly firing questions and verbal abuse at a victim who is hooked up to or holding an E-meter. A brief description of this practice occurs in a legal declaration (sworn under oath) by former member Stacy Young. She declared that her repeated protests about the way that (the now-current head of Scientology) David Miscavige treated staff led Miscavige to send her to the RPF in September, 1982 (5. Young, 1994: 8, 65). The specific incident that triggered her assignment was that Miscavige learned that Young had reacted to his (alleged) screaming fits by telling someone that he was "a brutal, tyrannical bully" (S. Young, 1994: 65). In response, Miscavige: • ordered me to submit to what wasknown as a 'gang bang sec check.' Two very large, strong men... locked me in a room and interrogated me for hours. During the interrogation, they .serearned and swore at me. They accused me of crimes against Scientology. They demanded that I confess to being an enemy agent (S. Young, 1994: 66) • Soon Young found herself in the RPF's 'Running Program," which involved "running around an orange pole for 12 hours a day" (S. Young, 1994: 66).

. Committees f Evidence'find Sea Org members guilty of serious crimes, then they send many of them to RPF programs. Inmates are not sentenced to the . programs for specific lengths time. Instead, they remain in until they complete a .rigorous program of hard physical labour, constant verbal abuse from immediate ! superiors. social isolation, intense co-auditing and checking, andstudy of Hubbard policies and techniques.

A series of policies about the RPF began appearing in January, 1974 when Hubbard was aboard ship, and a few revised versions of them have leaked out of the organization. One of these early documents revealed the totalistic nature of the program when it said that "[a]member the RPF is a member of the RPF and of nothing outside it, till released" (Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology, 1977: 3). Part of the program consisted of hard physical labour - building structures, cleaning, renovating, garbage disposal, and moving furniture. Typically work projects of this nature took about ten hours a day, since people were supposed to get"around 7 hours sleep, 5 hours study or auditing, 30 minutes for each meal, and 30 minutes personal hygiene, per day" (Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology, 1977: 4). They wore dark worksuits and were prohibited from speaking (unless necessary) with persons outside the RPF, and they ate and slept separate from other Sea Org members (Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology, 1977: 10). They had to run everywhere they went, and often they had to run extra distances punishment. On a ship, running punishments usually meant laps around the deck (Pignotti, 1997: 18-19). On land, running punishments sometimes meant running around a pole for hours at a time, often in hot sun (see Kent Interview with Pignotti, 1997: 22; S. Young, 1994: 66) . Severe restrictions were placed upon visitation rights with spouses or children (Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology, 1977: 10). Accounts from former inmates indicate thatRPF life can be extremely harsh, degrading, and abusive. Certainly experiences varied somewhat according to year and location, but Hanna Whitfield's description of RPF at the Fort Harrison Hotel in Clearwater, Florida in 1978 captures many common elements from other accounts that I haveheard and read: Some of us slept on thin mattresses on the bare cement floor. Some had crude bunk beds. There was no place for clothes, so we lived out of suitcases and bags were kept bare floors. Some privacy was maintained by hanging sheets up between bunk beds and between floor mattresses. The women and men had separate bathrooms and toilets but they were small. We were not allowed to shower longer than 30 seconds. We had only to run through the shower and out the other end. There was no spare time for talk or relaxation . We awoke at 6:30A.M. or earlier at times, did hard labor and heavy construction work and cleaning until late afternoon. After [a] quick shower and change of clothing, we had to audit each other and 'rehabilitate' ourselves until 10:30 P.M. or later each evening. There were no days off, four weeks arnonth. We ate our meals in the garage or at times in the dining rooms AFTER normal meals had ended. Our food consisted of leftovers from staff. On occasions which seemed like Christmas, we were able to prepare ourselves fresh meals ifleftovers were insufficient (Whitfield, 1989: 7-8). A similar, but more passionate, description exists of the Fort Harrison RPF in the account written by a woman using the pseudonym Nefertiti (1997), who in turn reproduces excerpts from ten other former Scientologists who related RPF-experiences aboard two Scientology ships, FLAG at Clearwater, Florida, Pacific Command in Los Angeles, and Happy Valley Hernet, California Certainly the amount of work that RPF members performed varied according to era and circumstances, but in some instances conditions became unbelievably bad. For example, In a California RPF, former inmate Pat reported thather RPF crew "worked shifts of thirty hours at a time" (Kent Interview with Pat, 1997: 25). Her RPF team would "start working the morning and we would work all night into the next morning and then we worked through the next day until we got our thirty hours and then we'd go to sleep" (Kent Interview with Pat, 199: 25). The most extensive description of the RPF at Scientology's facility near Hemet, California appears in a sworn declaration by former Sea Org member Andre Tabayoyon (1994). From comments that Bavaria's Minister of the Interior, Dr. Gunther Beckstein, made in a January 15, 1997 release, it is clear that he is familiar with this declaration. Tabayoyon stated that he spent approximately six years in the RPF his 21 years in the organization (A. Tabayoyon,.1994: 7, 8). In the RPF program that he was on beneath Scientology's Cedars Sinai Hospital building in Los Angeles, he . allegedly slept on "a slab inside the vault of the morgue." In the RPF in the property near Hemet, he stayed in "the chicken coop dormitory... which still smelled of chicken coup droppings [sic]" (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 18; see Kent Interview with Young, 1994: 20). hile nearly all RPF accounts speak of guards who were posted to prevent people from escaping the program, Tabayoyon reported that the guards at the Gilman Hot Springs facility (where Sea Org staff lived and an RPF operated) were armed (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 25). Indeed, he helped to constructthe facility's security system, which included "the perimeter fence, the ultra razor barriers, the lighting of the perimeter fence, the electronic monitors, the concealed microphones, the ground sensors, the motion sensors and hidden I cameras..,." He also said that he trained guards in the use of force, including the use of weapons, many of which had been purchased with "Church" money and are notregistered (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 15, 16). This facility (which sometimes is calledXsold" and other tlrnesHernet" in various documentsj'ls less than a two hour drive from Los Angeles and Hollywood, and on its property apparently are a number of facilities that Scientology's celebrities use. Part of the labour used to build an apartment for Scientologist and actor Tom Cruise allegedly was from the RPF (A Tabayoyon, 1994: 53). As Tabayoyon himself stated, "[u]sing RPFers to renovate and reconstruct Tom Cruise's personal and exclusive apartment at the Scientology Gold base is equivalent to the use of slave laborfor Tom Cruise's benefit" (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 53). In one instance, when Cruise's apartment was damaged by a mudslide, "prison [i.e., RPF] slave labor" personnel allegedly were "worked almost around the clock" to repair it (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 53). PAGE 9 5) The RPF's RPF More extreme than the RPF is the RPF's RPF, an institution even described in one of Scientology'sown dictionaries. According to the dictionary definition, thefirst inmate sent to the RPF's RPF was because the person "considered their [sic] RPF assignment amusing" (Hubbard, 1976: 451). Various accounts, however, also suggest that people who did not perform accordingto acceptable RPF standards ended up in this extreme program. Hubbard succinctly outlined ten restrictions under which inmates on the RPF's RPF operated. Six of the ten were: (1) segregated from other RPF members with regard to work, messing [eating], berthing (sleeping], musters [group assemblies] and any other common activity. (2) no pay. (3) no training. (4) no auditing. (5) may only work on mud boxes in theE/R [engine room]. May not work with RPF members. [Elsewhere Hubbard identified mud boxes as "those areas in the bilge which collect the mud out of the bilge water" (Hubbard, 1976: 341)]. (6) six hours sleep maximum (Hubbard, 1976: 451). Andre Tabayoyon, who spent 19 days on the RPF's RPF, summed up the program by saying that it "is designed to totally destroy any individual determinism to not want to do the (A. Tabayoyon, 1994: 9). Accounts both about people who were on the program, and from inmates of the program itself, are chilling, and they reinforce Tabayoyon's summation. Monica Pignotti, for example, spoke to me her five days in the RPF's RPF in 1975. She related that: [A]t thatpoint I was in a horrible depression and lwas crying almost all the . . time day long and I'm sure I was in a state where I probably would have been hospitalized if... any mental health professional had seen me then 'cuz I was severely depressed. But they sent me to the RPF's RPF and I was made to go down and clean muck from the bilges. That was my job all day long was to do that, getting up at four in the morning and - it was all day And then I was allowed a short meal break to eat by myself and then I had to go right back down there and I had to clean all this sludge out and then paint, paint lt.,.. [The person in charge of the RPF's RPF] would make the prisoners write these essays until they got it right, until they were saying what the group wanted them to say. So that was where I really snapped -- where I went into this state of complete - where I didn't feel anything any more after that. I was completely numbed out and I'd do whatever they said and I didn't rebel any more after my experience on the RPF. I stopped rebelling for a while (Kent Interview with Pignotti, 1997: 26; see Pignotti, 1989: 28-29). Nefertiti speaking.wjth a woman in her 'thirties on the RPF's RPF whose ankles were chained together while she was performing a "nasty" job in the basement of the Fort Harrison Hotel in Florida (Nefertiti, 1997: 3). Finally, Dennis Erlich reported that, for the first day or two of his time on the program in the basement at the Fort Harrison, he was locked in a wire cage and had a guard outside the room (Kent Interview with Erlich, 1997: 8). A final word must be said about the RPF, the RPF's RPF, and children. Some evidence exists that children may be subject to these programs. Monica Pignotti, for example, reported to me that she was an RPF inmate along with a twelve year old girl (Kent Interview with Pignotti, 1997: 30), and a posting in the news group by Steve Jebson stated that he had seen children on the RPF and child (whom he named) on the RPF's RPF (Jebson, 1997). Finally, a poorly reproduced document from Scientologyis Pacific Area Command (circa 1989) spoke about the "need to re-institute the Children's RPF" (Cohee, n.d.). One hardly has to point out that the RPF and the RPF's RPF brainwashing programs. Scientology operates them to break the wills of, and correct deviations of, its most committed members, and then to reformulate them into persons personalities directly mimic the orqanlzatlonal mould. That mould is itself a reflection of Hubbard's troubled personality. I am aware that many of my social scientific colleagues insist that researchers should restrict using the controversial brainwashing term only to situations .)- where there is incarceration and physical maltreatment (Anthony, 1990 :304). The RPF and the RPF's RPF, however, meet these criteria. These two programs also used forced confessions, physical fatigue, intense indoctrination through extended study of the leader's policies and teachings, humiliation, and fear. Persons familiar with the early history of Scientology are not surprised to see that Hubbard sanctioned a brainwashing program for his followers, since he almost certainly is the author of a brainwashing that Scientology printed and distributed for years beginning in 1955. PAGE10 6) Brainwashing The manual that Scientology distributed was entitled, Brain-Washingn A Synthesis of the Russian Textbooks on Psychopolitics ([Hubbard?], 1955). Purported to be an address by the noted Soviet police chief, Lavrenti Beria, it was exposed as a fake in 1970 by debunker Morris Kominsky (1970). As Kominsky noted, much of the book was "a vicious attack against the sciences and professions of psychology and psychiatry, as well as against the entire legitimate mental health movement" . (Kominsky, 1970: 538). Attacks of this nature remain a central element in Scientology's secular activities, and one former member-tumed-critic was almost certainly correct when he stated that the brainwashing book or manual "[w]as secretly authored by L. Ron Hubbard in 1955...." The former member also was absolutely correct about the importance of the brainwashing manual when he concluded that Hubbard "incorporated its methods into his organization in the mid 1960s and beyond" (Corydon, 1996: 107). One thinks automatically of the RPF, but we .know for certain that Hubbard had the manual as required reading for members of the Guardian Office (Anonymous, 1974). One chapter of the brainwashing book is especially pertinent to understanding Scientology's contemporary tactics against Germany and its officials. The organization's attacks on the national character of the country; its continual attempts to paint current events in the context of 1930s Nazism (for example, Freedom Magazine, [1996?]); its efforts to discredit current German government officials by linking them to Nazism through (so I was told) their older relatives; and charges that German churches campaign against . . Scientology for fear of losing members to it (Church of Scientology International, 1997: 101); all seem to have general parallels with tactics advocated in the brainwashing manual. I will read the relevant passages, but I will do so making similar substitutions of words in the text that Kevin Anderson made in his 1965 report to the Australian Parliament (Anderson, 1965: 198-199). By doing so, Anderson dramatically illustrated his claim that "a great part of the manual is almost a blue print for the propagation of [S]cientology" (Anderson, 1965: 84). Whenever the manual says "psychopolitics" or "psychopolitical," I will say "Scientology." I replace "psychopolitician" with "Scientologist,"and I replace "Communist Party Members" with "Sea Org members." With these substitutions in mind, I now quote excerpts form Chapter VIII entitled, "Degradation, Shock and Endurance:" Defamation is the best and foremost weapon of [Scientologists] on the broad field. Continual and constant degradation of national leaders, national institutions, national practices, and nationalheros must be systematically carried out, but this is the chieffunction of [Sea Org Members] in general, not the Scientologist ([Hubbard?], 1955: 41).

The officials of govemment, students, readers, partakers of entertainment, must all be indoctrinated, by whatever means, into the complete belief that the restless, the ambitious, the natural leaders, are suffering from environmental maladjustments, which can only be healed by recourse to [Scientology] operatives in the guise of mental healers. By thus degrading the general belief in the status of Man, it is relatively . simple, with co-operation from economic salients being driven into the country, to drive citizens apart, one from another,to bring about a question of the wisdom of their own government, and to cause them to actively beg for enslavement.

As it seems in foreign nations that the church is the most ennobling influence, each and every branch and activity of each and every church must, one or another, be discredited.... Thus, there must be no standing belief in the church, and the power of the church must be denied at every hand. ' The [Sclentotoqy] operative, in his programme of degradation, should at all times bring into question any family which is deeply religious, and should any neurosis or insanity be occasioned in that family, to blame and hold responsible their religious connections for the neurotic or psychotic condition. Religious must be made synonymous with neurosis and psychosis. People who are deeply religious would be less and less held responsible for their own sanity, and should more and more be relegated to the ministrations of [Scientology] operatives. - By perverting the- institutions of a nation and bringing about a general degradation, by interfering with the economics of a nation to the degree - ---that privation and depression about, only minor shocks will be necessary to produce, on the populace as awhole, an obedient reaction or an hysteria ([Hubbard?], 1955: 43-44). With only a little imagination, one can see that the brainwashing manual seems to providean outlinefor Scientology's battle plan against Germany. Through, for example, innumerable publications such as Freedom magazine, Sea Org members and other Scientologists produce-a barrage of material that ' denigrates the nation and its leaders. German Scientologists are now to label its political leaders as violators of human rights, thanks in part to criticism that the United States Department of State levelled against the country's attempts to curb the organization and boycott films starring American Scientologists (Lippman, 1997). On the economic front, critics might see events in the Hamburg real estate market as evidence of Scientologists' attempt to cause what the brainwashing manual called "privation and depression" among apartment renters. Reportedly Scientologists bought rental properties and turned them overnight into cooperatives. The chairperson of the Hamburg branch of the German real estate agents association, Peter Landmann, told the New York Times that these Scientologists were disreputable methods to frighten and coerce the renters into buying them back at high prices'" (Whitney, 1994: A12). Finally, of course, Scientology continues to blast psychiatry, attempting to link it with both Nazism and current German efforts against it. Hubbard, or whomever wrote the brainwashing manual's instructions about how to degrade a country, undoubtedly would be proud ofhis followers' public relations successes thus far. Indeed, from a public relations perspective, Scientology may be winning the battle, at least back in North America. When, for example, the prestigious New York Review ofBooks published an article on "Germany vrs. Scientology," the German reporter (who writes for the Suddeutsche Zeitung) strongly implied that government officials were scapegoating Scientology. His argument seems to be that attacks against the group have become part of a moral panic, when in fact other social issues, such as double-cligit unemployment, declining state generosity, tensions over European union, and problems with national identity, should be the real areas of concern (Joffe, 1997: 20). This argument, however, as well as the American Department human rights criticisms, shows a profound and increasingly inexcusable ignorance of disturbing if not dangerous abuses that occur as routine Scientology policy against many of its members. PAGE 11 Scientology and,Probable Human Rights Abuses. Evento may be a religion to many of its adherents, the basisfor German governmental opposition to it has nothing to do with what people believe. ,t has everything to do with what German government officials know the . organization does. concentrated heavilyon the . of most and I barely mentioned The assaults that . I bed are that officials knowabout, and with that knowledge they have no choice other than to see Scientologyas a threat to the democratic state. officials to'grant Scientology religious status, then even more than already now do would increase their involvement to the point of Org members, and then at least some of them would be subjectto the brutal conditions and that I described. With Germany's uniqueexperiences with both National Socialism and Communism, it is unthinkablethat responsible officials of a organization that throws

members_ into. .--forced labour and re-indoctrination. ,, One of the tragedies in this debate is that normal Scientologists will feel persecuted and threatened. These people likely know nothing about RPF conditions, and they genuinely feel that Scientology involvement has benefited them. The organization to which they belong, however, be committing serious human rights abuses. Consequently, I conclude my article by highlighting areas of concern raised by examining the United Nations' 1948 resolution entitled The International BillofHuman Rights (United Nations, 1996b), and the 1996 International Covenant on Economic, c Socialand Cultural Rights (United Nations, 1996a). First, Scientology's procedures involving committees of evidence, ,sec checking, gang bang sec checking, and the two RPF programs almost certainly violate Articles 9 and 10 of the Article 9 protects people against "arbitrary arrest, detention or exile" while article 10 guarantees "a and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his [sic] rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him" (United Nations, 1996: 23). Second, Scientology's punishment of members for merely discussing the merits of Hubbard's teachings, as well as its invasive probing into people's thoughts though sec checking, almost certainly violate Articles and 19 of the Bil/that deal with both "the right tb freedom of thought, conscience and religion" and "the right to freedom of opinion and expression" Nations, 1996: 25). Third, the various Scientology practices and procedures that I discussed may violate Article 17 of the Bill, which states that "[n]o one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation" (United Nations, 1996: 49). Fourth, the conditions of the RPF and the RPF's RPF almost certainly violate Article 7 of the Covenant, which discusses "the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work.." (United Nations, 1996a: 38). The article specifically identifies fair wages, "[a] decent living for themselves and their families..., [s]afe and healthy working conditions..., and [r]est, leisure, and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay...... (United Nations, 1996a: 38). Indeed, many Sea Org jobs themselves may not meet these reasonable standards of propriety, and fairness. »: Fifth and finally, the extreme social psychological assaults and forced confessions that RPF and RPF's RPF inmates suffer almost certainly violate Article 12 of the Covenant, which recognizes lithe right of everyone to enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health" (United Nations, 1996a: 18). These and probablyother serious human rights issues swirl around Scientology programs that have tax exemption and operate within the boundaries of the United States. With these serious issues in mind, the American human rights criticism of Germany's opposition to Scientology is the height of diplomatic arroqance. By granting Scientology tax exemption, the United States government is cooperating with an organization that appears to put citizens from around the world at significant mental health and perhaps medical risk. While in no way do I want my remarks to be taken as a blanket endorsement of the German government's rhetoric or tactics, on the battle with Scientology the government has the high moral ground. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Anderson, Kevin Victor. 1965. Reportof the Boardof Inquiry into Sciento/ogy. Melboume, Australia: A. C. Brooks. Anderson, Sue. 1980. "Honorary LRH PROs Around the World!" (July 28): 8pp. Anonymous [L. Ron Hubbard?}. 1974. "Confidential Intelligence Course." Guardian Order 1314 9): 3pp. Anthony, Dick. 1990. "Religious Movements and Brainwashing Litigation: Evaluating Key Testimony." in In Gods We Trust: New Patterns ofReligious Pluralism in America. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books: 295 344. Atack, Jon. 1990. A Piece ofBlue Sky. Scientology, Dianetics, and L. Ron Hubbard Exposed New York: Lyle Stuart. Beckstein, Gunther. 1997. "Measures Undertaken by the Govemment of the State of Bavaria Against Scientology." Posted on : (January 15). Bev. 1997. "Co$, Chemobyl, Radiation, and the Purif." Posting on (January 10): 2pp. Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology. 1977. "The Rehabilitation Project Force." Sea Organization Flag Order3434RB. Revised by Ens. Susan Walker, IIC, and Lt. Gg) Art Webb, 2nd; Re-Revised by Commodore's Messenger; Approved by L. Ron Hubbard, Commodore. (January 7,1974; Revised August 21,1976; Re Revised May 30, 14pp. Cartwright, Robert H. and Stephen A. Kent. 1992. Social Control in Alternative Religions: A Familial Perspective." SociologicalAnalysis 53 No. 4:" 345-361. Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre Intemational. 1995. Celebrity. Minor Issue 284. ----. 1996. Celebrity. Minor Issue 295. Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization. 1992. Flag Tech News. Issue 75: 8pp. Church of Scientology International. 1992. What Is Scienlology?Los Angeles: Bridge Publications. -----. 1994. "Honorary PROs in Action." Holline [The Newsletter of L. Ron Hubbard Personal Public Relations Office Intemational] VI, Issue 3: 6. ---. 1996. "Narconon Celebrating 30 Years of Saving Lives:" International Scientology News, Issue 2. Los Angeles: Church of Scientologylnternational. ----.1997. "The German Problem: Religious Discrimination." Advertisement in George [Magazine]. (June): 100-101. Church of Scientology of 1978. What is Scientology? Los Angeles: Publication Organization United States. Circuit Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida. 1998. "State of Florida vs. Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization, Inc..... Felony Information.CRC98-20377 CFANO-K. Pinellas County (November 13): 2pp. Cohee, Nedra. n.d. [circa 1989]. "Kids Scene in PAC." Memo: 1p. Coryden, Bent. 1996. L. Ran Hubbard, Messiah orMadman? Fort Lee, New Jersey: Barricade Books. Freedom Magazine. [1996?]. The Rise ofHatred and Violence in Germany [n.pl or pub.]: 167 pp. Gabriele. 1989. "[Untitled Letter to Commanding Officer, Pacific Area Command]." (October 24): 2pp. Gouessan,·Alain; for Vicky Zahler. 1989. "PAC Orgs Schedules & Family Time." Executive Directive (November 6): 1p. Hexham, Irving; and Karla Poewe. 1999. Church, State, And New Religions in Germany." Nova Religio 2 No.2 (April): 208-227. [Hubbard, L. Ron]. 1955. "Project Celebrity." AbilityMinor 11: 2. [Hubbard, L. Ron?]. Brain-Washing[.]A Synthesis-ofthe Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics. Los Angeles: The American Saint Hill Organization. Hubbard, L. Ron. 1960. "Interrogation." Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin (March 30): 2pp. ---.1961. "Johannesburg Security Check." Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter(April 7): 4pp. --. 1969. "Intelligence Actions[.] Covert Intelligence[.] Data Collection." Confidential Memo "To the Guardian WW [World Wide]: 5pp. ---. 1974. "The Technical Breakthrough of 1973! The Introversion RD." Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin of 23 January 1974 RA, Revised 10 February 1974; Revised 1 November 1974. Reproduced in L. Ron Hubbard, 1976. The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and ScientologyVolume VIII (1972-1975). Los Angeles: Scientology Publications: 346-353. ------. 1976. Modern Management Technology Defined Copenhagen: New Era Publications. International Association Scientologists. 1995. The Next Decade. The IAS 11th AnniversaryAnnualReport to Members 1984-1995. No Place or Publisher. International Association of Scientologists Administration [IASA]. 1995. Impact 63. Jebson, Steve. 1997. "Subject: Stephen A. Kent (Ph.D.) - Address Leipzig, Germany." (September 14); downloaded from . Jentzsch, Yvonne; and HarrietFoster. 1977. "Commanding Officer[.] Public Relations Organization[.] Administration Scale." Executive Directive SO EO 932 INT (May 31): 6pp. Joffe, Josef. 1997. "Germany vs. the Scientologists." New York Review ot Books {April 24}: 16-21. Kent, Stephen A. "Scientology's Relationship with Eastern Religious Traditions." Journal ofContemporary Religion 11 No. 1: 21-36; German Translations in "Scientology und ostliche religiose Traditionen," Berliner DialogHeft 1-97 (Ostern, 1997): 16-21; and "Scientology, religiose Anspruche und Heilungsschwindel." Berliner Dialog Heft 1-97 (Ostern, 1997): 22-25. ------. 1997a. "The Globalization of Scientology: Influence, Control, and Opposition in Transnational Markets." Unpublished Mss., 56pp'. ---. 1997b. "The Creation of 'Religious' Scientology." Unpublished Mss., 49pp. Kent, Stephen A. (Interviewer). 1987. "Interview with Fern [Pseudonym, on Scientology]." (December 7): 70pp. -----. 1994. "Interview with Robert Vaughn Young." (August 13):71pp. ---. 1997. "Interview with Dennis Erlich." (March 30): 18pp. ------. 1997. "Interview with Pat [Pseudonym, on Scientoloqy]." (March 12): 35pp. -----. 1997. "Interview with Monica Pignotti." {April 31pp. Kominsky, Morris. 1970. The Hoaxers: Plain Liars, Fancy Liars, andDamned Liars. Boston: Branden Press . Krueger, Curtis. 1991. "Little Time for Children..." St. Petersburg Times (November 10): 12A. Lippman, ThomasW;199Z. :'U.S. Criticizes Cermany on Scientology." Washington Post(January 27): A1, A9. Lobsinger, Robert W. 1991. "State Mental Health Board Denies Narconon Certification Bid," in The Narconon Story in Oklahoma As Recorded in the Pages bfthe 'Newkirk Herald Joumet: Miller, Russell. 1987. Bare-Faced Messiah. The True Story ofL. Ron Hubbard London: Michael Joseph. Nefertiti [Pseudonym]. 1997. "The Church of Scientology or the Guru's Gulags. Story of An Escape." . (May). Pignotti, Monica. 1989. "My Nine Lives in Scientology." Downloaded fromthe World Wide Web: 36pp. Reuters.1997. "Hollywood Does Hubbard." (March 18); downloaded from , file: "entertainmentsurnmayt.html", Shapiro, "Order, .Query Of." [Letter]. (December 5): 1p. (Plus Attachments). Swartz, Fred. 1989. Orgs Schedules and Family Time" [Letter]. (November 9): 1p. (Plus Attachments), Tabayoyon, Andre. 1994. "Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon," in Church of Scientology International vs. Steven Fishman and Uwe Geertz. United States District Court. Central District of California, Case No. CV 91 6426 HLH (Tx), (April 4): 64pp. (Plus Attachments). Tabayoyon, Mary. 1994. "Declaration of Mary Tabayoyon," in Church of Scientology International vs. Steven Fishman and Uwe Geertz. United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No. CV 91 6426 HLH (Tx), (April 4): 36pp. (Plus Attachments). Tobin, Tom. 1997. "Scientology Had Woman in Isolation:' St. Petersburg Times [Florida, U.S.A]. (February 21):·1Aff.

Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) KentSte-venA.

Marburg Journal ofReligion

Volume 6, No. 1 (January 2001) 11 Pages (27825 words)

__'__ , ,. _ _ _, •, •_ , • ·' _ · · _• •

PAGE I

THE FRENCH AND GERMAN VERSUS AMERICAN DEBATE OVER 'NEW RELIGIONS',SCIENTOLOGY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Stephen A. Kent Department ofSociology University ofAlberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2H4

Email:[email protected]

Abstract This article critically examines the allegations'ofreligious intolerance that United States officials and governmental staffhave leveled against France and Germany (along with other European countries) for their policies on, and actions toward, Scientology and other controversial groups. argues that American officials appear to be poorly informed about the bases for the Europeans' critical positions, and that those officials have been the recipients ofselective information provided by Scientology itselfalong with Scientology's supporters.

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftJjoumal/mjr/kent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stet-hen A. • _'

It concludes by offering a preliminary analysis ofthis Euro-American debate in the context of'international social movements' theory within the social sciences. -

Notice This article is a revised and expanded version ofpresentations made at the "Consultation on Religious Persecution as a D.S. Policy Issue", College (Hartford, Connecticut, USA), September 26-27, 1999, and available at: . and at the Leo J. Ryan Educational Foundation, March 18, 2000.

Contents

1) Introduction

2) Official Sources That Provide Information About Europ-ean Human Rights Issue

3) TIle F

4) Scientology's Successful Negotiations Receive Tax Exempt, Charitable Status from the American Internal

5) American Policy Makers and Relationships with Controversial Religions

5.1)

5.2) Scientology

5.3) America's 'Subversives' Filter-The U.s. Code

5.4 Hollywood Celebrities and Their 'Nazi' Analogy

6) Primary Groups Lobbying in Europe on BehalfofControversial 'Religions'

6.1) French Allegations Against Karen Lord

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft...... mal/mjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ster-hen A. .

6.2) Additional Groups in

7) The American Lesson About Privately Run "Cult" Information Organizations

8.1) Institut Theologique de Nimes, Greater Grace Ministries, and The Speak

9) French Governmental Actions and Issues

10) Religious Human Rights Violations on American Soil

10.1) Scientology's RPF Programs

10.2) Children

10.3) Human Rights Claims as Cloaks for Abuse Opportunities

lOA) Gem Arnlstrong, Silence Agreements, and the Right to Self-Dignity

11)

11.1) International Social Movements and Domestic Organizations

11.2) American Domestic Cultural Trends That Facilitated Scientology's Global Ex.pansion Efforts

11.3) Crumbling Communism and'Its on AspiratiQns in

1104) Mobilizing the International Community

11.5) Think-Tanks and Lobbyists

11.6) Appeals to International Governmental Bodies

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ste-tien A.

11.7) Countermovement

11.8) and the Internet

11.9) An Emerging Countermovement

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) Introduction

. In recent years, various officials ofthe United States government have been critical ofsome European approaches to groups variously called sects, cults, minority or alternative religions, and new religious movements. These groups have been the subject ofgovernmental studies in several European countries-Belgium (see Allard, 1999; Fautre, 1999), France (la Commission d'Enquete, 1995; 1999; see Introvigne, 1999a: 365 367), Germany (Deutscher Bundestag, see Seiwert, 1999), Sweden (see Swedish Government Commission, 1998), and Switzerland (Business Review Commission ofthe National Assembly, 1999), and many of these studies have raised concerns among American officials. Moreover, Scientology's battles in France, Greece, Belgium, and especially Germany, have gained considerable American press, and additional battles have involved the Jehovah's Witnesses in several European states (for example, La Commission d'Enquete, 1995: 70-71, 78, 79; 1999: 196,223 [for France]; Deutshcer Bundestag, 1998: 234 [for Germany]; Morvant, 1996: 1 [for Romania]). Some nations (for example, Austria, Belgium, France, and Poland [Luxinoore, 2000]) have established sect or "cult observatories" or other administrative bodies designed to gather information on groups and educate their citizens about the dangers concerning many ofthem. In turn.fhe existence ofthese observatories has caused Americans alarm.

In an attempt to counterbalance criticisms that France and Germany specifically have received over their stands toward Scientology and some other controversial organizations, this article will highlight human rights issues involving these groups (sometimes taking place in the United States) that American officials and staffusually overlook when scrutinizing the actions oftheir European counterparts. While I do not endorse all the positions that these European countries have taken in this very sensitive and complex debate, I do understand why French and German governmental officials believe that the Americans fail to appreciate their position that several groups, especially Scientology, are threats to democracies and/or citizens and require stem governmental opposition. In order, however, to lay the groundwork for scrutinizing the American's criticisms of France and

h 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. '''0

Germany over Scientology and other groups, it will be helpful to review some ofthe official sources that provideinformation about European human rights issues, especially in the context of factors that have contributed to the transformation ofEuropean religion in recent years.

2) Official Sources That Provide Information AbotltEuropean Human Rights Issues

At least to the English-speaking world, much ofthe information about religious human rights situations in Europe comes out ofthe United States, especially through two annual reports by the United States Department ofState. One ofthem is on human rights and the other (after passage ofthe International Religious Freedom Act of 1998) is on international religious freedom (United States Department ofState, 1'998; Public Law 105-292, 1998). These annual reports comment on rights issues in allofthe countries in the world (except the United States itself), and some ofthem have had critical sections on the supposed plight ofseveral 'religions' in various European countries. Serious violations ofreligious rights in countries can lead to American sanctions,

Also reporting on European human rights issues is the fifty-four nation Organization [formerly Conference] on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE, formerly the CSCE from 1974 to 1995). In 1976 the U.S. Congress established the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which people often call the Helsinki Commission (after the city in which the CSCE accords were signed). The Commission's responsibilities include the obligation:

to monitor and report on the implementation ofthe decisions of Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE [now OSCEn, a multi-nation diplomatic process that embraces issues from military security to economic and environmental cooperation to human rights and humanitarian efforts. To this end, the Commission pursues specific concerns at CSCE meetings, holds congressional hearings, leads delegations to CSCE countries, and publishes reports. The Commission has focused special attention on the implementation of human rights agreements by what was once the Soviet Union and the countries ofEast-Central Europe, as well as reviewinghuman rights questions raised with the United States (Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1993: iii).

Some ofthe Helsinki Commission's hearings in Washington, D.C., greatly offended French and German officials, as have some ofits delegations' meetings with these officials.

Europe, ofcourse, is an extremely complex part ofthe world, with ancient tribalisms cross-cutting languages, religions, and national boundaries. In its broadest dimensions, it includes Russia in the East and Greenland and Iceland in the West, and the state of'new religions' across these nations often varies dramatically. Various ways

httn:/lwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournallmjrlkent2.hOOI 1810812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ster-ben A. ,."

exist to group together the array ofcountries and their discussions on.sects and 'new religions,' but the most effective way is to do so according to membership in several existing political and economic associations. The fifteen nation European Union, for example, saw its Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs issue report on "cults" in late 1997 (Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs, 1997), only to have its European Parliament's plenary reject it in July 1998 andsend it back for further possible consideration (CESNUR, 2000a). The Council ofEurope (currently with forty-one member states) passed a recommendation on the "illegal activities ofsects" in 1999 (Council ofEurope, 1999). Also occasionally addressing issues related to these groups are the European Commission on Human Rights and the European Court ofHuman Rights (see Richardson, 1995), although concerns exist about their effectiveness (Gunn, 1996). In addition to the religious human rights activities ofthese European bodies, the United Nations also continues its monitoring ofthese issues, as do a number ofnon-governmental human rights agencies on national and international levels.

Heated debates over 'new religions' or sects have taken place between the French and Germans versus American officials, and those debates are the focus ofthis study . Most particularly, these debates have involved issues related to Scientology. Europeanreactions to this American-based transnational organization have become a sore point in international relations, and the sheer volume ofinformation that American agencies produce on human rights has muffled the European perspective on this group. Moreover, Scientology itselfhas carried out an aggressive campaign against the opposition it has received in France and Germany, and has found that these American governmental agencies, and many human rights non-governmental agencies, are receptive to its complaints (for example, Boyle and Sheen [eds.], 1997: 312-314). Ofcourse, the social and cultural contexts in which these debates take place were altered foreverby the collapse ofEuropean Communism, and it is worth highlighting some of the more significant ramifications that have direct or indirect bearing on the Scientology controversy.

PAGE 2

3) The Fall of the Berlin Wall and Its Impact UponReliglon

A new era for religion began in Europe with the fall ofthe Berlin Wall (beginning November 9, 1989). Religions whose presence in countries had been impeded or banned now rushed into what was new territory-territory now freed from strict societal control and restrictive travel regulations (Maxwell, 1992; Miller, 1993; Morvant, 1996: 1). By the summer of 1992, for example, eastern Germany "an estimated 300 groups [were] panning for members" (Fisher, 1992: A33; cr. Seiwert, 1999: A yearearlier, 18,293 converts were baptized as Jehovah's Witnesses in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Poland, Romania, and the Soviet Union, with more than 370,000 members attending thirty conventions in those former Communist countries (Maxwell, 1992: see Cimino, 1994). Likewise, teachers of"New Age" religions and philosophies

18/0812003 Marburg journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. •

saw similar opportunities, and by early 1992 they giving lectures and holding meetings in such cities as Prague, Budapest, and Cracow (Cimino, 1992; Lattin, 1992). Both American-based churches and Islamic groups proliferated in Albania, with the government's banishment ofScientology (after a corruption scandal) being a rare exception to an otherwise tolerantpolicy (Morvant, 1996: 2).

All the while, religions that had carved out space as opposition parties (such as Catholicism in the former East Germany and Poland) had to redefine themselves after the atheistic enemy that was Communism lost political power (see Cimino, 1990a; Richardson, 1997: 262-263). Other religions (like Romania's Orthodox Church) that had been closely aligned with now-fallenregimes scrambled to establish new identities. Certainly many ofthe religious forces at work after the fall of the Wall were exclusively European in content and context, such as the long-standing tensions among Protestants;Catholics, and the Orthodox churches(Cimino, I990b). Amidst these tensions, many European countries have variations on what amountto state-supported churches. Germany, Scandinavian countries, the United Kingdom, Greece, and so on, represent variationson this arrangement. This arrangement almost never excludes faiths from practicing, but it does favour certain religions (usually for historical and cultural reasons) with special status and benefits.

The missionary rush that many countries experienced involved waves ofproselytizers from organizations based primarily in the United States (Cimino, 1991; Moore, 1992: 40). The American-based missionaries represented numerous religious expressions, ranging from Evangelical Christians to heterodox Christians (Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses), and alternative religions c1aimants(such as Scientology). Even globalized, controversial groups such as the Hare Krishnas and the Unification Church/the Moonies have substantial American footholds. Based in the United States and elsewhere, some "established sects" had been recruiting in Europe long before the end ofCommunism, and had well-developed infrastructures and histories in various countries that had been behind the Iron Curtain (see Stark, 1985;Wilson, 1990: 128-148).

Launching from the American home-front, Evangelical Christians were the best-organized, with an extensive grass-roots organization and (after Ronald Reagan's presidential election in 1980) considerable experience with anticommunist, foreign affairs activities in such countries as El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, the Philippines, and South Africa (Diamond, 1995:219,223; Martin, 1999: 71-72). Various Christian Right organizations-Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority, PatRobertson's Freedom Council, Maranatha Campus Ministries, and the nee-conservative Institute on Religion and Democracy-attended White House briefings on Central America (Diamond, 1995: 218 ). Taken together, the members ofthese groups held "a conviction that increasing globalization is a fulfillment ofdire Biblical prophecies foreshadowing the return ofChrist and the onset of Armageddon, The very term by which most conservative Protestants identify themselves-'evangelical' announces their intention to carry their message, as Jesus instructed, 'unto all the world'" (Martin, 1999: 67) . Presumably, only conservative American Christianity, as envisioned bytheseevangelicals and developed in httn:/lwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

strain ofAmerican civil religion, could spare the world from tragedy (see Kent and Spickard, 1994: 374-382; Ribuffo, 1998).

Consequently, by the time that Europe opened up as missionary field, Evangelicals and Fundamentalists were well known in foreign affairs and State Department circles. Their missionary efforts frequently coincided with American political and corporate agendas, as State officials attempted to eliminate barriers to their foreign efforts as big money helped pay the costs. In the current religious rights debates in Europe, Evangelical Christians continue play a significant role on theAmerican 'side.'

For example, one member ofthe US. Department ofState's Commission on International Religious Freedom, John R. Bolton, came from a right-wing, business-aligned think-tank-the American Enterprise Institute (United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2000). Another commissioner is Nina Shea, Director of the Center for Religious Freedom ofFreedom House, which is a conservative Christian non-governmental organization that aspires to '''remoralize' American foreign policy" and "overturn the established-that is, liberal order" (Goldberg, 1997: 46, 52). The Commission's.executive director, Steven McFarland, had been the Director ofthe Christian Legal Society's Center for Law and Religious Freedom-"an organization ofevangelical Protestant lawyers" (Associated Press, 1999; United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 1999).

In early 1999, President Clinton appointed prominent evangelical Christian and the winner ofthe U.S. Secretary ofState's Distinguished Public Service Award, Robert A. Seiple, as the first V.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom-a positionfrom which he resigned in September 2000 [Carnes, 2000]). To a prayer group in January 1999, Seiple "recounted how his faith has sustained him through harrowing events in his life, including the 300 combat missions he flew during the Vietnam War. In addition, he served for 10 [sic: 11] years as president ofWorld Vision Inc., ..." (Loomis, 1999: I). Inthe early 1990s, World Vision was "the world's largest evangelical reliefand development agency" (Interhemispheric Resource Center, 1991: 2) whose projects annually reach millions ofpeople around the world. A report, however, on the organization nearly a decade ago concluded, "World Vision appears to suffer from conflicts between its intentions, its evangelical goals, and its entanglement in politics" (Interhemispheric Resource Center, 1991: 14). This conflict became apparent again in 1997, when other conservative Christians felt that World Vision's support of "family planning" implied that the organization supported abortion (which the organization did not [Morrison, 1997: 5]). I know (from private correspondence) that at least one French government official wondered whether Seiple's religious commitment influenced his perception ofreligious human rights issues.

Still another evangelical Christian in the human rights debate is Karen Lord, Counsel for Freedom ofReligion

'maVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, •

for the Helsinki Commission-a fact that she told me when met briefly in Washington, D.e. early in 1998. Finally, and most dramatically, in 1997 the Department ofState's Bureau ofDemocracy, Human Rights, and Labor Affairs published a report specifically on the American government's monitoring ofChristian persecution around the world (United StatesDepartment ofState, 1997b; see Martin, 1999: 76-77).

These American-based missionaries frequently encountered languages, cultures, and laws that they did not understand. Church-state relations; for example, vary widely in Europe, and they often vary in ways that perplex American visitors. Likewise, even the practice ofdemocracy in Europe, with parliaments or other bodies attempting to adapt national laws to trans-European agreements, is different from the American governmental experience (see Colomer [ed.], 1996). Germany, for example, has a constitution thatspecifically bans the secular government from establishing a state church, but state offices collect taxes for Catholicism,Judaism, and the numerous Protestant communities withwhich they have collection agreements. Moreover, the government must maintain a "militant" protection "ofthe free democratic basic order," which thereby obligates officials to monitor, and ifnecessary take action against, anti-democratic organizations operating in the country (see Kommers, 1997: 217, 510). Such action,however, cannot violate human rights agreements, which Germany has ratified. This pro-active position reflects the country's efforts to protect its democracy by attempting to ensure that a group like Nazism will never again gain political ascendancy. Because, however, this position has no American counterpart, some Americans bristle and recoil the idea that the German government (through its Federal Office for the Protection ofthe Constitution) officially monitors the American based group, Scientology (see Deutscher Bundestag, 1998: 291).

Somewhat differently, France's constitution defines the country as a secular state, but a 1905 clause gives the government the possibility ofdescribing religious groups either as non-taxable "associations ofworship" or taxable "cultural associations."Within its secular parameters, however, a French commission has identified groups which it believes are inimicalto the public order due to their totalitarianism, violations offundamental liberties, inordinate emphasis on finances, disregard for appropriate medical care, so on. These identifications have put the country at odds with the State Department, in part because some ofthe identi fied groups (such as Scientology and the Jehovah's Witnesses) have direct American ties.

The United States involves itselfin these European human rights debates over religion even though its government has not ratified the UnitedNations Convention the Rights of the Child (among other treaties). This failure to ratify crucial human rights treaties puts the V.S. at odds with ofthe.European countries. A scathing report, for example, about American human rights violations appeared in 1999 the non- governmental organization, Human Rights Watch. It reported:

18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ste- A. 1 V

[i]n 1998, the United States continued to exempt itselffrom its international human rights obligations, particularly where international human rights laws .grant protections or redress not available under V.S. law. In ratifying international human rights treatiesit has typically carved away added protections for those in the United States by adding reservations, declarations, and understandings. Even years after ratifying key human rights treaties, the V.S. still fails to acknowledge human rights law as U.S. law. Moreover, the V.S. is behind the rest ofthe developed world in failing to ratify the key international on women's rights and virtually alone in world in failing to ratify the international children's rights convention (Human Rights Watch, 1999: 2).

Consequently, the United States and key European countries hold each other and themselves to different standards on some very crucial human rights issues.

As these religious human rights debates escalate, Europeans remain aware ofthe major sectarian tragedies that happen occasionally around the world (Jonestown, Aum Shinri Kyo, Heaven's Gate, Waco, etc. [see La Commission d'Enquete, 1995:36]). Moreover, Europe has tragedies and "close-calls" ofits own. Twenty-one of the eighty Branch Davidians who died at Mt. Carmel in 1993 were British citizens (Thibodeau and Whiteson, 1999: 355 -357; Wright [ed.], 1995: 379-381), and most ofthe seventy-four murder/suicide victims ofthe Order ofthe Solar Temple (who died at various times from late 1994 to early 1997) were Swiss and French (see Mayer, 1999). Authorities believe that they narrowly averted disaster in 1998 when Spanish police arrested a sect leader, twenty-six adults, and five children on the island ofTenerife. Allegedly "its members believed that th the end ofthe world Was destined to occur" at 8pm on January 8 , 11and that their souls would be picked up by spacecraft and transported to another planet" (Brown and Millward, 1998). In mid-June 1999, Swiss officials became concerned that comments made by the UFO 'sect' leader, Rael, in his group's magazine, were suggesting that he was planning suicide and martyrdom for his followers (Stamm, 1999). With these points as background, permit me to present several issues that may help identify some ofthereasons for tension between European countries and the United States on religious human rights issues, particularly involving Scientology.

PAGEJ

4) Scientology's SuccessfulNegotlattous to Receive Tax Exempt, Charitable Status from the American Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Among the most controversial American exports to Europe was Scientology, a group whose religious claims received a dramatic boost its receipt oftax exempt charitable status by the IRS in October 1993. Researchers may never know all ofthe behind-the-scenes negotiations that went on between Scientology and the IRS leading

.. rhllro 18/08/2003 Marburg.Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. •

up to the agreement (see Frantz, 1997), but publicly anIRS spokesperson "said that Scientologists provided sufficient information on salaries paid to church officials for the government determine that executives were not receiving any improper benefits" (Chronicle ofPhilanthropy, 1993). Another factor, however, that Scientology leadership apparently influencing the decision was the large number of lawsuits-one Scientology source says 2,300 (International Association fo Scientologists, 1994?: 1r; Miscavige, 1993: 30)--the organization and its members had brought against the governmental body. Consequently, in a victorious speech that the current leader gave to hisfollowers about theIRS agreement, he reported, "the attorneys workingfor the government defending these law suits were to become so inundated that their entire budget would be wiped out handling ourcases" (Miscavigc, 1993: 23; Church ofScientology International, 1993: [3]). Not surprisingly, therefore, the IRS negotiated the termination ofall ofthese lawsuits in the final Scientology agreement.

Many aspects ofthe decision seem remarkable. While the organization may have owed up to a billion dollars in back taxes (see Miscavige, 1993: 27), it only had to pay the IRS $12.5 million (Department ofthe Treasury Internal Revenue Service, 1993: 8). The Church Tax Compliance Committee that the two parties established to monitor Scientology's adherence to the agreement consisted ofScientology's leaders-an arrangement that some critics thought was like having foxes watcha hen house (Department ofthe Treasury-Internal Revenue Service, 1993: 7, 16). But at least two aspects ofthe decision revealed thatScientologyrealized immediately that it could market that decision globally. First, it ensured that a branch ofits international organization dedicated to both propagating the ideology and attacking transnational enemies-the International Association of Scientologists-was among the organizations that specifically received charitable designations (Department of the Treasury-Internal Revenue Service, 1993: 10). By this designation, Scientology could give tax receipts to Americans providing resources toward the organization's international propagation efforts. Most dramatically, however, was the aspect ofthe agreement that required the IRS to send a statement about the exemption to all countries in the world (Miscavige, 1993: 32).

This agreement between Scientology and the IRS essentially provided the organization with the same tax designation held by a wide variety ofreligious organizations. Consequently, Scientology now was able to represent instances ofresistance to it various European countries as examples ofreligious discrimination against an American-basedgroup On those 'discrimination' claims, Scientology began to receive support from the American Department ofState, which has as its mandate to protect Americans, American organizations and interests, and religious freedomoverseas. Indirectly, too, the IRS-Scientology agreement helped create a political atmosphere in Washington that became receptive to Scientology spokespersons, especially Hollywood celebrities, speaking to politicians and other government officials about the alleged discrimination that they and their organization suffered in Germany, France, and other European countries.

I1ni -mnrhurs.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaUmjrlkent2.htrnl 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

5) American Policy Makers and Relationships with ContrQversial Religions

The prominent role that Scientology celebrities played on Capital Hill (and which I discuss in more detail later) highlights an important issue inthe Franco-German versus American debate overScientology and other controversial groups. Several European countries are concerned about the excessive access that some controversial religions have tQ American policy-makers. Europeans believe that these controversial religions are providing American policy-makers with information that often is questionable in content and accuracy. They also believe that this questionable information overshadows the facts and interpretations that the Europeans themselves try to provide.

5.1) The Unification Church

Examples abound ofwhat the Europeans mean. Well known, for example, are the politically conservative circles in which Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church operates, and most commentators realize the political power that its conservative newspaper, The Washington Times, has among some policy-makers. Two former American Presidents-George Bush and Gerald Ford-have spoken at Moon-sponsored conferences, as have Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Jesse Helms (R-NC), Jack Kemp (R.. Richard Lugar (R-IN), and Pete Wilson (R-CA) (see Clarkson, 1997: 53, see 45-75). Although, in comparisonto Europe, the Unification Church's influence has been greater in other parts ofthe world such as Latin America andAsia, it has entered the European religious rights debates through conferences sponsored by one ofits organizations, the International Coalition for Religious Freedom.

The International Coalition for Religious Freedom has held four conferences-in Berlin; Washington; Sao Paolo, Brazil; and Tokyo, They pull together what sometimes is an impressive array ofacademics, middle-level or former governmental officials, non-governmental organizations and lobby groups (such as Freedom House and its Director, Nina Shea [see International Coalition for Religious Freedom, 1998; 1999]), along with representatives from controversial religionsthemselves. (Shea, ofcourse, became a Commissioner in the State Department's Commission on InternationalReligious Freedom, prior which she served on the Advisory Committee on Religious Freedom to theU.S. Secretary ofState [United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2000].) '

What concerns some European officials.however, is that the sponsoring organization, the Unification Church, is directed by a convicted tax-fraud felon (United States Court ofAppeals.... , 1983; see Lubasch, 1982; News American, 1984; Washington Post, 1983) who advocates a theocratic government (see Barker, 1984: 88-89; Bromley and Shupe, 1979: 97-106)-one that.would be inimical tQ various human rights standards. Many

.. ' .naVrnjrlkent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. r-age U1 IJ

Europeans are reluctant(and the case ofthe Germans, unable) to give much ifany latitude to organizations whose human rights demands toward society may cloak anti-democratic, authoritarian actions against their own members. The French, moreover, cannot support an organization that likely strives undermine the country's constitutional separation ofchurch and state Officiel, 1905).

5.2) Scientology

By far the most controversial religious human rights lobby-group that has impacted American foreign policy in Europe is comprised ofScientology's Hollywood celebrities. Theiraccess to politicaldecisiori-makers has diminished the stature ofAmerican foreign relations officials.in the eyes oftheirGennan and French counterparts, and also probably in the eyes ofother informed Europeans. In 1996 1997, a Scientology affiliate, Religious Technology Ccnter, in Los Angeles was paying $725,000 to a Washington-based firm to lobby Congress on Scientology's behalf (Dahl, 1998: 14a). The lobbying firm was Federal Legislative Associates, and in 1998 three ofits staff-Stephen Amitay, Lybra Clemons,and David H. MilIer--received another $420,000 for their efforts-by far the largest amount spent by eight "clergy and religious organizations" which reported (according to American law) their spending on lobbyists that year (Center for Responsive Politics, 1998). Working with three particularScientology celebrities-John Travolta, Isaac Hayes, and Chick Corea-this lobby firm helped to arrange a number ofhigh-profile meetings on Capitol Hill.

What irritates various European officials so much, especially the Germans, is that these Scientologists have official public relations titles inside the Scientology organization itself. The founder ofScientology is L. Ron Hubbard (often abbreviated to LRH) and all three ofthese celebrities are LRH Public Relations Officers (see the list attached to Anderson, 1980; 1,3; Church ofScientology International, 1994). As LRHPublic Relations > Officers, these people have the assignment to "help make LRH's accomplishmentsand technology known to the public," through such activities as radio and television talk shows, letters to newspapers, magazines and professional journals, and meetings with leaders (International Association ofScientologists, 1990).

Probably through the efforts ofthe high-paid Scientology lobbyists, Travolta, Hayes, and Corea made presentations before the Helsinki Commission in September 1997. A photographer for a New York newspaper captured the Chairman ofthe Commission at .the time, Alfonse.D'Amato.Jiugging Travolta on the day on which Travolta "testified about persecution ofScientologists" the hearing (New York 1997).

Earlier in 1997, President Bill Clinton met Travolta at a conference in Philadelphia, and the American President told Travolta that he wanted to help him with Scientology's problems in Germany. He followed up on that

•I •••: .18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. I.J .

promise by arranging for the White House political affairs director to set up a briefing Travolta and other Scientologists with national security advisor, Sandy Berger (Young, 1998: 138). Even before Travolta and Clinton met, an exclusive article that .Clinton wrote against drug-use appeared in Scientology's propaganda magazine in France (Clinton, 1996). and Scientologists, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, contributed $14,000-part ofthe $58,000 they donated between i 998 and mid-June 2000--to the Senate " campaign ofClinton's wife, Hilary (Stern, 2000). (Their other recipients included Al Go-re [$5,000] and the Democratic Minority Leader in Senate, Tom Daschle [$2,000] [von Rimscha, 2000]). A high-profile Scientology lawyer in Washington; D.C., Coale, husband ofScientologist lawyer and television commentator, Greta Van Susteren) gave $20,000 to theDemocratic party (which is Clinton's party) in 1998 (Jacoby, 1998: 5) and $70,000 by March 2000 (Wayne, 2000: Al). In August2000, when Travolta introduced the President at a $25,000-a-plate fund-raising dinner for the Clinton presidential library, the celebrity gushed, IIILet's raise our glasses to our President, the greatest president ofall time'" (Travolta quoted in Kennedy, 2000: 2).

On June 14,2000, Scientologist and actress, Catherine Bell, filled in for her friend (and Scientologist), Anne Archer, before the House Committee on International Relations. (Worth noting is that The Washington Post reported on her upcoming testimony, but confused fantasy with reality by running a picture ofher in her television character's U.S. Marine uniform, which gave the impression that Bell was in the military [Grove, 2000].) Bell, like other Hollywood Scientologists before her, criticized Germany's position on the organization to which she belongs, and (as part ofher presentation) introduced German citizens in the audience who allegedly had experienced discrimination in Germany because they were Scientologists.

Among the Germans she introduced was "Ms, Antje Victore, who in 1997 became the first German Scientologist to be granted asylum by a V.S. immigration court on the grounds that she faced ruinous religious persecution ifshe had to return to Germany" (Bell, 2000: [3-4]). Bell could not have known that, two weeks later, Germany's Stem magazine would expose her asylum application as fraudulent. Already in deep personal financial trouble herself, Victore feared that she was going to be called as a witness against her former Scientologist boss who was about to go on trial for tax evasion. Ifshe were to have been put on the stand, then she likely would have been pressed to provide information about Scientology's business activities in Germany. Consequently, in an effort to get her out ofthe country, Scientology agents from the organization's Office of Special Affairs got at least five Scientology business owners to write fake letters to her, all rejecting her for employment because ofher Scientology involvement. Apparently on .the basis ofthese fake "job rejection" letters, an American immigration judge granted her asylum. In sum, part ofBell's testimony before the committee was based information that her organization provided her about a fraudulent event " (Kruttschnitt, Nuebel, and Schweitzer, 2000; see Billerbeck, 2000).

18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. 1 Vl

The other Scientologist who testified at the hearing (Chick Corea apparently was scheduled to speak, but was unable to attend) was Craig Jensen, Corporate Executive Officer ofExecutive Software, a company that wrote the disk defragmenter program that Microsoft uses in its Windows 2000 program. (Adefragmenter rewrites all files on a disk or hard drive so all parts each file stored on contiguous sectorsrather than spread throughout it.) It is not clear how far back Jensen's relationshipgoes with the House committee chairman, Benjamin A.'Oilman (R.NY_20th), but onJuly 2, 1998 Craig Jensen and a "Sally Jensen" (also'of Executive Software) were among ten California Scientologists who donated to Gilman's campaign fund (totaling $7,400). (Both Jensens gave $1,000 [Center for ResponsivePolitics,1999: 18; cf. von Rimscha, 2000: 2]). The following year (on October 21, 1999), Gilrnan, along with Representative Matt Salmon (R-AZ), introduced a bill (House Resolution 388) that (had it not died in committee) would have chastised Germany for its treatment Scientology (Oilman, 1999; see Cienski,1999).

Before Oilman's committee, Jensen complained that Hamburg, Germany's Ministry ofthe Interior, in conjunction with the state's "Working Group AgainstScientology,' instituted a so-called 'sect-filter' requiring that potential employees declare that they are not affiliated with Scientology (Jensen 2000: 4). Consequently, some German government officials were calling for "a full-scale government prohibition on the sale of Windows 2000 in Germany" (Jensen, 2000: 2). These same objections had led the V.S. Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky, to challenge the German position a month before Jensen's appearance, even suggesting that the U.S. would file a formal complaint against Germany at the World Trade Organization ifthe issue were not to be resolved (Burgess, 2000).

German information on the practice is readily available on the State Bavaria's web site, where it describes its 'sect-filter' by stating, that, as ofNovember 1, 1996, contractors had "to submit an affidavit (affidavit of protection) in certain cases declaring they were not followers ofthe Scientological teachings," claiming, "public offices run the risk ofbeing infiltrated when entertaining business contracts with Scientology" (Government ofthe State ofBavaria, 2000). "Software consulting" was one type ofbusiness about which these officials specifically were concerned (Government of State ofBavaria, 2000).

Jensen was unable to say why German officials reacted so dramatically to the newsthat his company designed a program that was part ofthe Windows 2000 package (Jensen, 2000: 2 n.2), yet the reasons were not difficult to discern. As German Ambassador, Jurgen Chrobog reported in his letter to the House committee:

The Federal Labor Court ruled in 1995 that Scientology was not a religious congregation, but a commercial enterprise. The court quoted oneofL. Ron Hubbard's instructions to 'make money, make more money-make other people produce so as to make money' and concluded that Scientology purports to be a 'church'merely as a

18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

cover to pursue its economicinterests, Therefore, Germany does not consider the Scientology organization a religion. It is not alone in this assessment: Belgium, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain; Israel, and Mexico, to name a few, share this view.

German authorities also concerned about Scientology's documented history oftaking advantage of vulnerable individuals, and that its totalitarian structure and methods may pose a risk to citizens and our democratic society (Chrobog, 2000, 1-2; but on the complicated position ofScientology in Italy, see the "Italian Supreme Court" entry and discussion in CESNUR, 1999).

Jensen spoke as ifGerman actions were examples ofreligious discrimination, but in Germany the Scientology organization is not religion and, according to many ofits governmental officials, a probable threat democracy.

Moreover, Jensen failed to inform House committee that a reason German officials were especially concerned about his company's involvement with the software was because they feared espionage by Scientology itself. Their concern was that Scientologists (who, like him, presumably were involved in product design) could have placed a secret code in the program that would have allowed the organization to enter the software while it was defragmentingand read the disk or hard drive's contents. These fears were grounded in Scientology's history of espionage activities against government targets around the world.

Eleven Scientologistswere convicted on conspiracy and theft chargesin 1979 and 1980 for operations that they had carried out against several federal offices United States District Courtfor the District ofColumbia, 1979; 1980). In 1992, the Church ofScientology ofToronto and seven Scientologists were convicted on various criminal charges related to their infiltration ofthe Ontario Provincial Police and the Ontario Ministry ofthe Attorney General (Court ofAppeal for Ontario, 1997; see Claridge, 1992a; 1992b). A Greek court case against Scientology's "Center ofApplied Philosophy ofGreece" (KEFE) revealed a document apparently indicating that a Scientologisthad given KEFE a classified report from the Hellenic Intelligence Agency ofthe government (Beneas, 1995: 3-4). (Not surprisingly, the court ordered the organization to cease operations completely [St. Petersburg Times,.1997; Washington 1997]). In December 1990, a Scientologist and two private investigators received three month suspended sentences for illegal espionage in Denmark (Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contra les Sectes, 2000: Finally, French officialsmonitoring 'cults' believe that Scientologists "succeeded in infiltrating the environment ofa former state president .. ." (Alain Vivien, quoted in Luedenscheider Nachrichten, 1999)-presumably Francois Mitterrand (Heimgaertner, 1999: 2)--and possibly got inside the judicial.police (AFP, 1999b). Taken together, therefore, Germany's security concerns about software developed by a prominent Scientologist certainly are justified. Jensen, however, failed even to mention

httD://www.ani-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftJJ nal/mjr/kent2.htrnl 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ste A. 1 1

his organization's history ofgovernmental espionage when testifying before the House Committee on International Relations. His failure to do is unfortunate, since this information would have helped committee members understand Germany's reaction upon learning that a software company owned by a prominent Scientologist contributed to the Windows 20000perating system.

PAGE

5.3) America's 'Subversives' Filter-The V.S. Code

In all ofthe debate over Germany's "sect filter," no one has pointed out striking similarities between it and the "loyalty oath" that American civil servants in the federal and District ofColumbia governments must sign. According to 5 USC Sec. 7311 ofthe United States Code:

[a]n individual may not accept or hold a position the Government ofthe United States or the government of the District ofColumbia ifhe-

(1) advocates the overthrow ofour constitutional form ofgovernment;

(2) is a member ofan organization that he knows advocates the overthrow ofour constitutional form ofgovernment....

The U.S. Code specifies that an employee can be investigated, and possibly suspended, terminated or legally charged, for "[e]stablishing or continuing a sympathetic association.with a saboteur, spy, traitor, seditionist, anarchist, orrevolutionist, or with any espionage or other secret agent or representative ofa foreign nation, or any representative ofa foreign nation whose interests maybe inimical to the interests ofthe United States" (U.S. Code, Sec.S. [3]).

Without getting further into the merits ofGermanofficials' perception ofScientology, many ofthem see that organization as a threat to their democratic state because ofthe group's ofespionage in the context of intra-organizational totalitarianism and probable human rights abuses against many ofits members. Germany's Ambassador, Jilrgen Chrobog, summarized most of these conclusions in a letter that he to Congressman Gilman in 1997, after Gilman's Committee on International Relations received a bill that six congressional members sponsored a House Resolution protesting Germany's alleged discrimination against religious minorities (House ofRepresentatives, 1997). Succinctly, Chrobog wrote, "there are increasing indications that the Scientology organization uses totalitarian and thus unconstitutional means to oppress its members and their families" (Chrobog, 1997: 1). Consequently, German government officials, like their American counterparts, htto://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaI/mjrlkent2.htrnl 1810812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

maintain the right to bar such people from civil service positions and otherroles involving the receipt ofpublic money or sensitive information.

5.4 Hollywood Celebrities and Their 'Nazi' Analogy

Certainly the most incendiary event involving celebrities was the "open letter" to Chancellor Helmut Kohl in January 1997 that equated the German government'shandling of Scientology with Nazis'persecution ofJews prior to World War It Many ofthe thirty-four Hollywood celebrities who signed it hadcloseties to prominent Scientologists John Travolta and Tom Cruise, and German officials were infuriated with the letter (Whittell, 1997). (Indeed, to their credit, the State Department and the Secretary ofState denounced the Nazi comparison [see United States Department ofState, 1996;1997a], as did the United Nations investigator on religious freedom [Higgins, 1998].) Seen in context,however, with the Scientology celebrity lobby, all ofthese incidents indicated to the Germans (and, for that matter, to the French [Bouilhet and Dore, 1999; Ternisien, 1999: 14)] that American foreign policy toward their country about religious human rights was being unduly influenced by what many critics cleverly call "Scientologywood."

6) Primary Groups Lobbying in Europe on Behalf of Controversial 'Religions' 1

While the Scientologylobby has had a surprising impactinside the United States government, intense lobbying on the part ofvarious interested parties also occurs on intemationallevels. A document, for example, that a Greek court made public showed very clearly that Scientology in Greece set out to "[e]stablish comm[unication] lines in the area ofHuman Rights groups" (Office ofSpecial Affairs, 1995: 7), and it is certain that the organization has attempted to forge similar links with rights organizations throughout Europe. (For example, from Poland in September 1994, German Scientologists sent a four-page "Executive Summary" about their group's supposed plight in Germany to delegates participating in the CSCE summit in Budapest [Scientology Kirche Deutschland 1994].)

The highest profile lobbying and group for controversial religions is CESNUR (the Center for Studies on New Religions), which is based in Torino, Italy (with contacts throughout Europeand North America) under directorship ofpatent/trademark lawyer and independent scholar, Massimo Introvigne. A persistent critic ofany national attempts to identify orcurtail 'cults,' Introvigne has spoken out against what he considers to be intolerance toward "minority religions," especially Belgium, France, and Germany. On July 30, 1998, for example, he spoke about (alleged) intolerance and related issues before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (i.e., the Helsinki Commission) in Washington, D.e., concluded by against public sponsorship ofprivate anti-cult organizations (which he dislikes partly because, he says,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft( .nal/mir/kentz.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. 1 v I

they ignore scholarly findings [Introvigne, 1998)). He expanded on these themes in his 1999 presentation to the OSCE, which met in Vienna (Introvigne, 1999b). (In turn, Karen Lord ofthe Helsinki Commission, and Jeremy Gunn--who has been on the staffofthe United States Institute ofPeace, the United States Department ofState's Commission ofInternationalReligious Freedom, and the U.S. Mission to the at CESNUR's June 1999 conference in Pennsylvania [CESNUR, 2000b]. Both Lord and Gunn alsowere scheduled again to speak at the 2000 conference in Latvia [CESNUR,2000c)). Many observers ofEurope's "religious tolerance" wars, however, share the observation made about Introvigne and his associatesin Holland--that they are "very partial toward the public defense ofthose sects (for which they are often members) which have been discredited" (Louter, 1997: 5)

For example, Introvigne publically endorsed a fiction book written by the controversial (now deceased-by suicide) guru, Dr. Frcderick Lenz (Zen Master Rama)-known for his materialism, financial exploitation of members, and the likely sexual coercion ofmany ofhis female devotees (Konigsberg, 1998). "Those who disagree with the alternative spirituality world view (once called New Age) in general will probably also disagree with this book," Introvigne concluded in his endorsement ofLenz's Surfing the Himalayas. "They may, however, recognize it as the real thing, the work ofa key figure in the alternative spirituality tradition" (Introvigne, 1998?). Likewise, his testimony on behalfofScientologistson trial in Lyon; France (in a case that led to manslaughter and fraud convictions involving six ofthem) did little to erase his "sect-friendly" image (A.R. [F], 1997; Cossu, 1998; Morgan, 1998). Moreover, controversies around some ofhis scholarship (especially about both "Internet terrorism" 'and the American Psychological Association's discussion on "brainwashing" and coercive persuasion), plus additional questions about his membership in the ultra conservative Catholic organization, Alleanza Cattolica, have brought Introvigne into battle with critics (see Sarper and Martinez [eds.], 1999).

Many German and French officials working on issues related to religious 'sects' and human rights do not see CESNUR and Introvigne as neutral parties in the ongoing debates (a judgement that certainly flows both ways). Consequently, other people and organizations have damaged reputations (rightly or wrongly) among these officials by associating too with CENSUR. Certainly this is the with the United Kingdom's "new religious" information organization, INFORM, which is organizing a conference with CESNUR in200l (CESNUR, 2000d). (Many scholars, however, see both CESNUR and INFORM in a favourable light, and they share criticism ofthe "sect-monitors" in France, Germany, and Belgium.)

6.1) French Allegations Against Karen Lord

The most significant example ofa person's association with Introvigne and CESNUR damaging her reputation

-Uvovuvu 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. 1 _

among some governmental officials apparently happened in the case ofKaren Lord. On March 22, 1999, Lord had been present at an OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting on Freedom ofReligion in Vienna; where the OSCE issued a scathing report on the condition of"new religions" or "sects." It stated that the French National Assembly had:

published the Guyard Report, which listed 172 cults deemed harmful and dangerous. This resulted in media reports libeling minority religions, the circulation ofrumors and false information, and incitement ofreligious intolerance. Against this background, a manifold pattern ofvirtual persecution hasdeveloped. Minority religions have been publically marginalized and stigmatized, and there have been attempts to hinder their activities ....

Basing this report on a July 7, 1998 "press release" (updated on March 1999) by a Belgium-based group called Human Rights Without Frontiers, the statement specifically mentioned the Interministerial Mission Fighting Cults (MILS) and its President, Alain Vivien. According to the OSCE statement, The Mission's actions have led "to slanderous reports in the media, to professional prohibitions, to religious discrimination by the French authorities and to increasing intolerance from civil society towards people on the grounds of their personal religious beliefs"(OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting ... , 1999).

Representing MILS at the OSCEmeeting was its secretary-general, Denis Barthelerny, who responded to four 'attacks' that were similar to the OSCE Supplementary statement, three ofwhich claimed originated with Scientology and the other by the Jehovah's Witnesses. He attempted to explain France's position on religious human rights, and mentioned that religious freedoms can conflict with collective freedoms on a number of points (Barthelemy, 1999). Subsequently, Introvigne,whose paper was among those to which Barthelemy responded, called his statement an "hysterical reaction"(also "an emotional statement-at times verging on hysterical" [CESNUR, 1999?]). Needless to say, the French were extremely displeased by the entire affair

About two weeks after the OSCE meeting (on April 6, 1999), MILS officials received a delegation representing the American Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, and among them were Jeremy Gunn and Karen Lord (both ofwhom, French officials believed, were supporters both ofmany controversial groups and of the French critics at the OSCE). Making tense matters even worse, the MILS officials had requested normal background information on the delegation prior to their and their official sources indicated to them that a member ofthe delegation was either closetoScientology or an member. Deducing that the suspect person may have been Lord, the President ofMILS, Alain Vivien, refused to answera question that she posed, and only answered to the head ofthe American delegation.

naVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. Vi r »

The Americans were insulted. Ina June 8, 1999 hearing ofthe Helsinki Commission, Cc-Chairman Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R CO) overstated the incident when he said that Alain Viven:

originally refused to meet Karen Lord sitting right here, a member ofour staff, and her delegation because he obviously had wrong information. This incident was certainly an eye opener for this Chairman and for the members ofour Commission because she was thought to be part ofa dangerous sect. .

Well, alarm bells went offall over Washington and 'certainly among the Democrats and Republicans that make up this Helsinki Commission. We have a very good, broad group ofconservatives and liberals and moderates on the Commission (quoted in Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1999: 41-42).

For their part, the French still angry at the criticisms these delegates and others were leveling at their policies while at the same time seemingly supporting Scientology and other controversial groups. On June 11, 1999, MILS discussed the incident concerning Lord within a four-page general letter, in which it indicated its surprise at her membership in the visiting delegation, since she was "implicated to be near or a member ofa sect" ("mise en cause comme etant un proche ou membre d'une sec/e") [Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contre les Sectes, 1999: 3)).

Soon after the tense Franco-American meeting, both Lord and Gunnmade presentations to the June 1999 CESNUR conference in Pennsylvania, where apparently they indicated that CESNUR played an important role in providing information to American officials about religious tolerance in various Western European countries (CESNUR, 2000b: 1). In the eyes ofFrench officials, the involvement ofboth LordandGunn with CESNUR simply reinforced their distrust ofthese Americans. Gunn, in turn, remained affronted by the incident between the MILS president and Lord, so a year after it happened, he presented an account ofit before the House International Relations Committee (on June 14,2000). He stated that Lord was not a Scientologist, and next he challenged Vivien "either to provide evidence support it [i.e., the Scientology claim1or to issue an apology to Ms. Lord and the United States" (Gunn, 2000a: 7-8). The CESNUR web site also reported on the incident, and dismissed the allegation that Lord was ofa dangerous international totalitarian cults [sic]" by saying that she "is a member ofa small U.S. Christian congregation" (CESNUR, 2000b).

6.2) Introvigne's Critique of the MILS's Report for the Year 2000

Hostility between CESNUR and MILS shows no sign ofabating, ·as Introvigne continues his criticism ofthe French govemmental'anticult' organization. Most recently, Introvigne scoffed at the responses that MILS

nni-marburz.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaVrnjrfkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Ste.. A.

offered to the September 2000 Report by the D.S. Department ofState's Bureau ofDemocracy, Human Rights, and Labor on "International Religious Freedom" (United States Department ofState, 2000a; 2000b). French . officials asserted that their country's balance between, on the one hand, freedom ofconscience and, on the other hand, public order providedJar greater religious protections than did the American model (which only emphasized conscience issues [Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contra les Sectes, 2000b: 8-9]). With this assertion as background, the French report specifically challenged the authority ofthe Department ofState to make pronouncements about the nature various organizations operating in France. A section within the Department ofState's "executive summary" about the larger report criticized France in a section subtitled, "Stigmatization ofCertain Religions by Wrongfully Associating Them with Dangerous 'Cults' or 'Sects'" (United States DepartmentofState, 2000a: 6). Since part ofthe first amendment to the American Constitution states, "Congress shall make no respecting an establishment ofreligion," the MILS report wondered what gave the State Department the 'right' to pronounce on "the religious nature or not ofa group, a movement, a cult, or a sect or any other body" within French borders when it could not do so in its own land (Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contra lesSectes, 2000b: 8, 18). Likewise, when the executive summary of the International Religious Freedom report mentioned the French list of 173 'cults' and concluded, "[a] few of the groups on the list are clearly dangerous, but most are merely unfamiliar or unpopular" (United States Department ofState, 2000a: 7), MILS replied that the Americans apparently had made lists themselves but failed to convey them! (Mission Interministerielle Lutte contra les Sectes, 2000b: 18).

Introvigne dismissed these and other French challenges by concluding, "[t]he most egregious part of the [MILS] report is an unprecedented (even by MILS [sic] standard) assault on the United States," including its Constitution (Introvigne, 2000). He discarded the MILS officials' about the superiority ofthe French over-the-American stand toward religion by mentioning the "the massacre ofhundreds ofthousands ofRoman Catholics and other religious dissidents during the [French] Revolution" (Introvigne, 2000). Indeed, he added, "MILS can only be understood within the framework ofFrench century-old aggressive secular humanism grounded in the French Revolution itself" (Introvigne, 2000)-a conclusion that suggests the conservative Catholic orientation ofthe CESNUR

In a cryptic but important sentence, Introvigne used this "secular humanism" criticism to explain why the French indicated that the U.S.gave sanctuary to "militarized organizations ofsome large multinational cults" that go so far as to proclaim a "'Call to Arms' against democratic institutions" «Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contra les Sectes, 2000b: 36 n. 9). Unless readers knew (Introvigne claimed) the secular humanistic orientation ofMILS officials, the French report's statement about militarized cults receiving American sanctuary "would seem a simple incident ofunchecked foolishness by individual anticultists unwisely invested with an official position" (Introvigne,2000).

http://www.uni-marburg.delreligionswissenscha:f( ..d1lal/mjr/kent2.html J8/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stp hen A.

What Introvigne's dismissive CESNUR Jailed to mention,however, was that this French allusion to militarized cults gaining American sanctuary almost certainly was to the American charitable status that the Internal Revenue Service had granted toScientology, Presumably the French understood thatthe structure of Scientology's 'elite' Sea Org[anization] resembles a military structure (complete uniforms and ranks), and that at least one ofits main .facilities (at Hemet, California) apparently has personnel trained in the use of explosives, semi-automatic rifles, and other stockpiled weapons (Tabayoyon, 1994, paragraphs 28-33). In addition, the Frenchofficials also likely knew that a member in Scientology's "Office ofSpecial Affairs International" had issued a "Call-To-Arms" against Germany on May 4, 1994 (in response to what it called "neo-Nazi government attacks" against it [Buchele, 1994]). Moreover, these officials certainly knew ofthe "Call to Arms" against France itself, issued by theChurchof'Scientology International's President, Heber Jentzsch (Jentzsch, [2000]). Introvigne, therefore, had attempted todismiss MILS and its annual report without providing contexts for the report's claims, and this attempt will reinforce the opinion ofMILS officials that the Italian based organization is a biased, apologetic 'cult'-defender.

6.3) Additional Groups Lobbying in Behalf of Controversial 'Religions'

As far as governmental officials in several countries believe, CESNUR is not the only European group apparently lobbying on behalfofallegedly controversial "minority religions." These officials are convinced that another group--Human Rights Without Frontiers (run by WiIly Fautre in Belgium)-shares the .same agenda, partly because the group seems quick to postfavourable information about Scientology and other groups (see the comment in MiBarthelerny, 1999). Likewise, the membership-ora British Lord in Scientology, Baron Duncan James McNair (see Muir, 1994), discredits a group to which he belongs-the Counseil pour Les Droits de I'Homee etla Liberte Religieuse--in theeyes ofthe French. (In 1999, McNair wrote to Lord Russell Johnston, who was the President ofThe Parliamentary Assembly ofthe Council ofEurope, that the French situation ofhaving the Interrninisterial.Mission Fighting Cults working within the French Prime Minister's office "equates to having the Witchfinder General installed at No. 10 Downing Street" [McNair, 1999]). Likewise, the Germans dismissed Mcb[air's "Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Discrimination Against Ethnic and Religious Minorities in Germany" because ofhis Scientology involvement, as they doa new Scientology sponsored "organization" (or so it seems) on the Internet, Foundation for Religious Tolerance (Foundation for Religious Tolerance, 2000).

The Council ofEurope became so concerned about the availability ofbiased information from lobbyists that it recently passed a resolution stating:

It is ofprime importance to have reliable information on these groups that emanates neither exclusively from

18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

the sects themselves nor from associations set up to defend the victims ofsects.

Consequently, the Council has recommended that the governments of member states '.'where necessary, to set up or support independent national or regional information centres on groups ofa religious, esoteric, or spiritual nature" (Council of Europe, 1999: 2). To some American officials, it is unthinkable that governments would collect information on religious groups. From a European standpoint, however, these centres may be the best way to control the quality of information thatgovernment officials, law enforcement, and the general public receive.

7) The American Lesson About Privately Run "Cult" Information Organizations

Another reason that the Council ofEurope has called forgovernment-funded information centres is because it has learned from the American experience thatprivately run so-called "cult-information" organizations are extremely vulnerable both to infiltration by sect-planted spies and to destruction by the very groups that they attempt to monitor. Indeed, many ofthe controversial new religions are really multi-faceted transnationals that have ready access to enormous resources-far more than any"cult-information" or "cult-monitoring" private agency ever could muster (see Kent, 1999a). The American example ofthe Cult Awareness Network provides Europeans with a negative model-a worst case scenario--that occurred when a "cult-monitoring" agency lacked state protection.

To simplify a complicated story, Scientology bankrupted the Cult Awareness Network through legal challenges and, finally; a highly questionable court case, and through them acquired its name, logo, phone number, and files as part ofthe bankruptcy payment. All the while, Scientologyhad a spy in the Cult Awareness Network office who was filing secret reports about the organization's strategies to avoid and protect its files. The personal correspondence that distraught parents or former members sent to the Cult Awareness Network now is in the hands ofits greatest enemy-Scientology, and new Cult Awareness Network directors have offered to turn over the files to the respective.groups themselves (see Kent and Krebs, 1998b: 39-42). This kind ofgross violation ofprivacy and confidentiality would not happen ifthe European nations have governmentally-sponsored monitoring informationsharing agencies, as has been recommended by the French, the Germans, the Belgians, and the Council of Europe.

Key American government officials;however, seem to be uninformed aboutthese in their own country. The Chairman and Co-Chairmanofthe Congressional Caucus on Committee on Human Rights International Relations, Tom Lantos (D-CA) and Benjamin A. Oilman (R-NY), protested to the President ofThe Parliamentary Assembly ofthe Council ofEurope, "[t]here are grave risks that encouraging the formation of

httD:llwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftlJ .rnal/mjr/kentz.html 18/08/2003 MarburgJoumal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. I J

'information centres' will in fact result in the dissemination of misinformation that will reinforce unfair stereotypes and contribute to the growth ofintolerance rather than understanding" (Lantos and Oilman, 1999: 2). These officials seem to be unaware ofthe misinfonnationthat is disseminated by non-governmental, directed or influenced information and lobbying organizations, the most blatant ofwhich-the 'new' Scientology directed CAN-operates in the United States itself.

PAGE6

8) The Belgian and French 'Sect Lists'

Among the most frequently criticized activities by Western European governments is the production (by government-commissioned bodies) ofreports that name groups as being sects (or, as some people prefer in translation, cults). A 1997 Belgian parliamentary commission on potential dangers from cults (see Allard, 1999) spoke about them both as small, but not harmful, groups within religions and harmful groups espousing religious or philosophical purposes that involve illegality, harm, or the impairment ofhuman dignity (United States Department ofState, 1999a: 2). The final report, however, listed 189 sectarian (or cult) groups operating in the country (for a partial list see Religious Tolerance, 2000), but in so labeling them did not identify whether they supposedly were or were not harmful.

The Belgian Parliament adopted the commission's report (but not the list of,cults'), and by doing so established a "Center for Information and Advice on Harmful Sectarian Organizations." This Centre was to involve itself in proposing relevant legislation and providing general public education, but the law prohibited it from providing opinions about particular organizations (United States Department ofState, 1999a: 3). In, however, one ofits educational campaigns, a government agency implied that the Anthroposophic Society was a dangeroussect, and the Society successfully sued togetthe offensive material removed (United States Department ofState, 1999a: 28; see Fautre's comments in Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1999: 22).

Relying heavily on material provided byHumanRights Without Frontiers, the OSCE criticized Belgium in a report on "Religious Discrimination and Related Violations ofHelsinki Committees," after its March, 1999 meeting in Vienna (International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, 1999). The OSCE could not have foreseen, however, the raids (in Brussels, Malines, Louvain, and Heidonck, as well as in France) against an array ofgroups and businesses associated with Scientology (apparently in response to a 1997 Brussels complaint by someone seeking to recover money she had paid into the organization 1999a]).

The fact that the Scientology raids occurred simultaneously in Belgium and France indicates that the two countries work together on at least some sectarian or cult issues. One ofFrench too, which a

18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

Commission ofInquiry Into Cults ofthe National. Assembly produced, bears some similarities to the Belgian effort, with the French naming 172 'cults' in addition to the Jehovah's Witnesses (La Commission d'Enquete, 21-25, see 60). Likewise, as happened in Belgium, the Anthroposophists protested their inclusion in the French list, and in March 2000 they won an court judgement of20,000 francs and an additional 90,000 francs in damages. The judge in the case issued a scathing evaluation ofthe principal investigator, Jacques Guyard, and the research methods ofthe Commission ofInquiry, denying its status asa serious report (Dumay, 2000).

American officials added their criticisms to the report, but in doing so unintentionally demonstrated the merit of French officials having actually printed the names ofthe 'cults' about which it was concerned. Among the critics was Jeremy Gunn, in his capacity as Director ofResearch and Deputy General Counsel for the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. (Gunn's interest in France dates back at least to 1975, when he was a History and Humanities instructor in Paris for his alma mater, Brigham Young University [Gunn, 2000b: 3].) In his June 14, 2000statement before the U.S. House International RelationsCommittee, he listed six methodological concerns that he had with the compilation ofthe French list by the French Commission of Inquiry Into Cults and other publications by MILS. He claimed:

1) The Commission did not consult with informed academics or scholars ofnew religions.

2) Neither the Commission nor MILS officials consulted with current leaders and members of the 'sects.'

3) The major documentary evidence behind various French reports came from closed police files, the contents ofwhich neither groups nor its members can refute or even see.

4) The Commission and MILS generalized onto the groups themselves from the alleged misdeeds (or even proven crimes) ofmembers (for example, with the fraud and manslaughter convictions of Scientologists in Lyon).

5) By focusing on problems that within groups rather that on the problems themselves, French reports lost the ability to compare the frequency ofthese occurrences to neutral populations.

6) The French 'anti-cult'movement(includinga report published by in 2000) relied upon "untested accusations against groups and ignores findings that ofttimes exonerate groups" (Gunn, 2000a: 12, see 10-12).

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafu.) .maVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent,

He concluded his analysis by referring to "the 'methodology' ofprejudice" that underlies reports being produced by the French Interministerial CommissionCombating and the French Assembly'sCommission ofInquiry Into Cults (Gunn, 2000a: 12).

While not wishing enter into a comprehensive methodological debate, each of-these criticisms nevertheless has a ready response. Gunn's .chastisement ofthe French investigators' failure to consult scholars about the 'new religions' actually have been an attempt on the part ofofficials to avoid biasin their findings. Undoubtedly MILS and Commission members felt that a number ofscholars themselves have been.compromised by various groups, so it was pointless to rely uponmariy ofthem for unbiased information. Indeed, this debate about objectivity and impartiality among scholars who write on so-called 'new religions' now rages within both social scientific circles and Internet communities (Kent and Krebs, 1998a; 1998b; 1999; Lewis, 2000; Melton, 2000; Reader, 2000; see Hausherr, 1999), and certainly French officials would not have been able to solve it.

Initially regarding Gunn's second point, it also seems reasonable that consultations with current leaders and members likely would provide important sources ofinformation. This likelihood would be true, however, ifthe groups allow informants to speak freely, critically, and without fear ofretaliation,which often is not the case. Along these same lines, legitimate fear ofretaliation requires that investigative agencies keep reports secret. The fact that French officials used police files ofthis nature actually indicatesthat it obtained access to highly confidential material that the publicrarely sees. Moreover, these governmentalofficials would be justified in generalizing crimes from the perpetrators to their organizations ifand when they show that the people were committing "religious crimes" or"crimes for religions" "in accordancewith groups' operational goals" (Kent, 1998: 121).

Regarding Gunn's fifth methodological criticism, comparative studies of"incidence rates" ofdeviation or crimes certainly are worth seeking, but researchers can conduct examinations ofone type ofsocial organization-in this case, minority religious claimants-in an effort to determine internal activities ofa deviant and/or criminal nature outside ofa comparative context. Finally, on Gunn's sixth point, exonerating evidence is important to acknowledge, but sometimes it reflects elements other than an accurate rendition offacts. Along these lines, Gunn mentioned that MILS has listed the Children ofGod/The Family as a problematic sect, yet brutal raids of Family communes byFrench police in 1993 on suspicions ofchild sexual abuse led to a judge dismissing all charges against group members and closing the case (Gunn, 2000:2; see Richardson, 1999: 181). Indeed, citing information like this is crucial for a balanced report that convinces informed scholars and officials, but even in this Family case much is open to interpretation. For example, a 1995 ruling bya British judge concluded, "I am totally satisfied that there was widespread sexual ofyoung children and teenagers by adult members of The Family, and that this abuse occurred to a significantly greater extent with The Family than occurred in society outside it" (Ward, 1995: 111; see Kent, 1994: 167-169). IfWard were to have been correct (and very

httn·"www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafVjournal/mjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 M:arburg ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Sr-nhen A. .··u

good documentation indicates that he is), then the important questions about the French raid (and several others around the world) involve the failure ofofficials to find child sexual abuse victims rather than ones about the group's exoneration amidst persecution. (Likely answers would address The Family's destruction of controversial 'underage sex' publications in the late 1980s and early 1990s; rehearsals among members about answering questions by authorities; fear amongthe Family children ofbeing permanently removed from their parents and friends; and doctrinal changes around child sexual practices in the early 1990s). Future MILS reports would be less open to criticism if they were include some examples that appear (at first glance) to contradict their findings, but the sparsity ofsuch information in reports up until now does not necessarily invalidate their contents.

8.1) Institut Theologlque de Nimes, Grace Ministries, and The Bible Speaks

Putting these important methodological questions aside, some ofthe best evidence for the value ofFrench authorities having named sects (or 'cults') comes, inadvertently, from an analysis ofa group whose cause Gunn has championed. In his meeting with French MILS officials on April 6, 1999 (as part ofa three person American delegation), Gunn spoke about the alleged plight ofthe .InstitutTheologique de Nimes (also called Eglise Evangelique de la Grace). The group's pastor in France, Louis DeMeo, has complainedabout discrimination against his group and its members after the Institutshowed up on the 'cults' list, and (as a French official informed me), Gunn reiterated many ofDeMeo's claims to MILS. (Apparently MILS officials supported the Commission ofInquiry's placement of it on the list because their information told them that some ofthe group's educational methods probably violated the International Convention on the Rights ofthe Child-one of the conventions [the French pointed out] thatthe American government had not ratified [Mission Interrninisterielle de Lutte contra les Sectes,1999 :2].) Moreover, Gunn probably had this group in mind when he told the House International Relations Committee (on June 14,2000), that among the French and Belgian lists were such established groups as "Southern Baptists" (Gunn, 2000a: 10). Indeed, Massimo lntrovigne called DeMeo as the "leader ofan independentBaptist group" (CESNUR, 2000b).

For a group that (at least according to the ,1995 French report) has somewhere between fifty and five hundred members, the Institut has attracted a great deal ofAmerican attention. In, for example, the V.S, Department of State's Annual Report on Religious Freedom for 1999 has four paragraphs devoted to it, most ofwhich repeat its discrimination claims as the result ofthe "sect" label (United States Department ofState, 1999a: 33). Equally important, DeMeo testified before the Helsinki Commission at its June 8, 1999 meeting in Washington, D.C., where he related his harassment and discrimination accounts to the committee. They include: allegations about brainwashing in children's education; job discrimination; denial ofaccess to a public hall; and financial discrimination from a bank and the governmental tax authority. In addition, DeMeo complained that he could not do anything to get French officials to remove his group's name from the list (DeMeo in Commission on http://www.Wli-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftJ ,.naVmjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal of Religion (January 2001) Kent, Ste-hen A. 1 ,_,

Security and Cooperationin Europe, 1999: 27-30).

Information, however, that members ofMILS published in January2000 about the American parent church of the Institut, Greater Grace Ministries (ofBaltimore, make it highly unlikely that they plan to change their opinion (see Greater Grace Missions, 2000).MILS that it had learned from various press sources that Greater Grace Ministries had worked with Scientology to take-over an 'anti-cult' organization and transform it into a "cult-defending" one (Mission Interrninisterielle de Lutte contra les Sectes, 2000: 19). The action which the report alluded involved Scientology's take-over of the Cult Awareness Network, assisted by a Greater Grace minister and spokesman, George Robertson.

The story ofGreater Grace Ministries illustrates why French officials resent criticism from American officials about their critical,stance toward some groups. In essence, theministry's founder and central pastor, Carl H. Stevens, Jr., had used undue influence to defraud a member (Betsy Dovydenas) out of$6.6 million (US) when he ran a ministry called The Bible Speaks in Lenox, Massachusetts. Dovydenas won a 1982 court decision against her former pastor, but she got little ofher money back since The Speaks had declared bankruptcy (with some of the money having gone toward Stevens's purchase ofa Florida condo [Russell, 1999: 18]). According to an article that appeared shortly the trial in the Boston Globe Magazine:

[t]he ferocity ofJudge James F. Quenan Jr.'s decision [against Stevens] came asa even to Betsy's attorneys. Queenan was convinced of'an astonishing saga ofclerical avarice,and subjugation on the part ofthe Church's founder, Carl H. Stevens.' The decision wenton: 'He has abused the trust ofthe Claimant [Betsy Dovydenas] as well the trust of good 'and devout members ofthe Church.. The judge was convinced that Stevens Idemanded the Claimant's total submission to him.... In short, the Claimant was a marionette at the end ofa number ofstrings manipulated by Stevens (Boucher, 1987).

Stevens, meanwhile, closed down his Lenox operation and moved to Baltimore in 1986 and established a new group, Greater Grace Ministries, with help ofanother pastor, George Robertson.

Robertson was never ordained by a recognized institution, and he described this new organization'in Baltimore as "having an 'independent evangelical orientation that recognizes Baptist teachings'" (Robertson quoted in Russell, 1999: 18). Critics ofthe French who say that their officials are suppressing Baptist groups do not realize the tenuous (and perhaps, nonexistent) relationship that the Institut (through its American parent body) actually has with the Baptists. '

, ' Robertson served as a spokesman for Greater Grace (Crockett, 1987), and in new church (like in Stevens's

• •• , • ·18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion 2001) Kent, St--hen A. ... "" ,.

previous one), he and his congregants had to suffer the criticism ofthe old Cult Awareness Network, which considered it a cult and frequently said so to the media. Consequently, soon after settling into Baltimore, Robertson became the executive vice president "and moving force" ofa group called Friends ofFreedom, which spent much ofits time attacking the Cult Awareness Network and aligning itselfwith efforts being undertaken by Scientology (Martin, .1992: 3). When Scientology bankrupted the old Cult Awareness Network and took over its operation, Robertson became its new chairman (Hansen,1997: 68). Having established, therefore, this close connection between the Institut's parent American bodyand Scientology,French MILS officials are unlikely to soften their stand toward the organization. They also suspect that they now know how this small group became so well placed in American governmental circles-it used its Scientology connections.

PAGE 7

9) French Governmental Actions and Issues

Despite setbacks that someofthe French studies have received, these reports sufficiently reflect (ifnot influence) governmental opinion about the dangers ofsome "sects." Partly because oftheir influence, the French National Assembly unanimously passed a bill that established a crime of"mental manipulation." (It still has to return to the Senate for a second reading.) As punishment, this new crime could lead to a five-year imprisonment.and 50,000 franc fine. Moreover, two convictions ofmembers on charges such as life endangerment, illegal medical use, or false advertising could result in the dissolution ofthe 'cult' itself(AFP, 2000; Henley, 2000; see the law itself in Assemblee Nationale, 2000). It remains tobe seen whether this bill actually becomes law,but ifit does then it is possible that government officials will use it to attempt to close down Scientology (AFP,2000)-a goal that MILS already has put before the Prime Minister in a report (St. Petersburg Times, 2000):

One earlier attempt by the French Council ofState to curtail the organization by demanding its back-taxes while refusing it permission to pay them with funds from outside the country was struck down in March 2000. The European Court ofJustice ruled (in a case-that Scientology brought to it) that the government could not require prior notice before the organization could receive direct foreign investment-investment thatScientology had needed in order to meet the government's tax demands(European Court ofJustice, 2000; see United States Department ofState, 1999b: 8). In another case, the state had to pay 20,000 francs in damages to two plaintiffs after the state had failed to make photocopies offorty-four documents that mysteriously disappeared in 1998 (Reuters, 2000) . This disappearance was unrelated to the 1999 disappearance ofthree tons offiles related to another Scientology case, which eventually got explained as clerical error (Washington Post, 1999).

10) Religious Human Rights Violations on American Soil

__ • •• -j 8/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

While much debate among American government officials has taken place about whether actions against Scientology by French and German constitute human rights violations, comparatively little . discussion has occurred concerning probable crimes and religious human rights abuses that occur on American soil. These probable crimes andabuses are the very type ofactivities that European officials are trying to protect their citizens against,but they have nearly an impossible taskwhen it comes to impressing this perspective upon their American counterparts.

10.1)Scientology's RPF Programs

The most dramatic casein point involves the knowledge that many European government officials have about Scientology's operation offorced labour and re-indoctrination programs in California and Florida. Similar programs run in England and Denmark. These abusive programs, named the Rehabilitation Project Force or, simply, RPF, involve forcible confinement, physical coercion, social and psychological degradations, obligatory confessions, and hard labour, which the Scientology organization imposes upon its most committed but deviating or poorly performing members. American media have discussed the RPF beginning as early as 1984, including Forbes magazine, the Los Angeles Times, The ClearwaterSun, TheSt. Petersburg Times, and, most recently, ABC's 20/20, A&E's Investigative Reports, and magazine. Moreover, the WorldWide Web is replete with information about it (see the versions ofKent, 1997).

Especially because ofGermany's mid-century history, it will never grant Scientology religious status as long as it operates forced labour, RPF programs anywhere in the world. When, however, a delegate ofa German parliamentary commission on sects brought up the RPF in a 1998 meeting with the Assistant Secretary ofthe Bureau ofDemocracy, Human Rights, and Labor, this State Department official had no ideawhat the delegate was talking about. Hints at the Germanfrustration over the Americans' lack ofknowledge on this subject came out in a quote given by the German chairperson ofthe delegation. She told a reporter, "The knowledge ofsome US representatives about the totalitarian aspect ofScientology is limited. With time the USA will also come to the realization that this is about an anti-democratic anti-pluralistic organization, and then a country like America will have to wake up'" (AFP.1998).

10.2) The American Failure to Protect Children from Harmful Religious Practices

The American refusal to ratify the UN Convention on 'the Rights ofthe continues to allow Europeans to charge that the US has not paid the kind ofappropriate attention to child protection issues as they are attempting. For example, in 1998, two American researchers published an article, "Child Fatalities From Religion-motivated Medical Neglect," which concluded, "[wjhen faith healing is to the exclusion of

httn·//www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaUmjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

medical treatment, the number ofpreventable child fatalities and the associated suffering are substantial and warrant public concern. laws may be inadequate to protect children from this form ofmedical neglect" (Asser and Swan, 1998: 625). They identified twenty-threereligious groups that held "core beliefs of medical care avoidance" (Asser and Swan, 1998: 628). After the study was published, the authors discovered an American church that has buried seventy-eight children since 1955 in its own graveyard, and another that had twelve children die in less than a twenty-year period (Swan, 1998: 6) Once again, the American experience has taught that the state must take a role in protecting some children from the faith oftheir parents, and some European national reports on sects or 'cults' have discussed the need to protect children in this regard.

Remarkable to the Europeans is that American legislation specifically exempts children from necessary medical care on religious grounds. The Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act states, '''Nothing inthis Act shall be construed as establishing a Federal requirement that a parent or legal guardian provide a child any medical service or treatment against the religious beliefs ofthe parent legalguardian'v(quoted in Swan, 1998: 99). Almost certainly this clause is the result oflobbying by the Christian Science Church, which in the past hired legal teams thatincluded such high profile individuals as the eventualWhite House prosecutor, Kenneth Starr, and future Secretary ofState, Warren Christopher (Swan, 1998: 7). Bycontrast, European nations have committed themselves to protecting children from medical neglect caused by parents. As stated in Article 24 ofthe United Nations "Convention on the Rights ofthe Child:"

States Parties recognize the right ofthe child to enjoymentofthe highest attainable standard ofhealth and to facilities for the treatment ofillness and rehabilitation ofhealth. States Parties shall strive to ensure thatno child is deprived ofhis or her right ofaccess to such health care services (United Nations High Commissioner for : Human Rights, 1989: 9).

The right ofchildren to medical care, therefore, supercedes the wishes ofparents who would deny them available care on religious grounds (as happens in parts ofthe United States).

10.3) Human Rights Claims as Cloaks for Abuse Opportunities

The example of exemptions for children's medical treatment in the US has led European officials to wonder about the.extent to which some American groups are attempting to cloak criminal or harmful activities behind claims ofreligious protection on national and 'intemational levels. Inits report, for example, at the beginning of2000, MILS indicated that it concerned about sects "frequently using the religious mask" ("le sectarisme utilisantfrequemment le masque transgress laws (Mission Interministerielle de Lutte Contre Les Sectes, 2000: 18). This cynical perspective already had some evidence to support it from a Time

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft. ..nal/mjr/kenfLhtml 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stet-hen A. -

magazine article that mentioned unexpected impact ofa Florida religious liberty protection law (Cloud, 1999). In that state, a Scientology organization faced criminalcharges that involved the unlawful practice of medicine (which, by the way, is a major issue in France, Italy, and Spain) and the abuse or neglect ofa disabled adult. These charges (which the state eventually dropped because ofproblems with the coroner's report) stemmed from the death ofScientologist LisaMcPherson(State ofFlorida vs. ChurchofScientology Flag Service Organization, Inc..., 1998: 18). A related civil case against Scientology still is pending. (McPherson died in 1995 after beingin Scientology's care for 17 days.) Scientology, however, argued that these interfere with its right to practice its faith, which is now protected by state statute (Cloud, 1999: 33). By extension, many European officials are concerned that the staunch American focus on what it considers to be international human rights issues may legal cover for American-based organizations that are involved in harmful or criminal actions. This concern is legitimate.

10.4) Gerry Armstrong, Silence Agreements,and the Right to Self-Dignity

.Lost amidst Scientology's assertions that France and Germany are violating the human rights of its members is . the reality that the organization itselfmay be involved with violating the free speech and self-dignity rights ofa former member, Gerald (Gerry) Armstrong. Indeed, some ofScientology's efforts to silence Armstrong are in response to remarks that he made while visiting Germany. The court case in which this free speech issue resides is complex, and through that case Armstrong currently has two warrants outstanding for his arrest in California. The facts in the case, however, suggest that Armstrong is not the guilty party. In order to understand how and why Armstrong's free speech and self-dignity rights might have been violated, we first need to review his tortuous relationship with the Scientology organization. .

Armstrong had been in Scientology for about twelve years (between 1969 and 1981), which included two periods in the RPF (totalling 25 months [Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County ofLos Angeles, 1984: 1461, 1473]). In January, 1980, as a member ofthe Sea Org, he received Hubbard's approval perform for a biography of the leader, and soon was passing along important documents (with the organization's permission) to Omar Garrison, whom the organization selected as the biographer. Arrnstrong helped assembleapproximately 400 binders ofrelevant material, plus conducted interviews with dozens of people (including relatives) who had known Hubbard during various phases ofhis life. By 1981, however, Armstrong began to realize that Hubbard and Scientology had misrepresented crucial aspects ofHubbard's life, and this realization, combined withScientology's unwillingness to correct them, led to his resignation from the Sea Org in December. He continued, however, to assist Garrison with his research, and he stayed in touch with Scientology's biography project ofits leader (see Breckenridge, 1984b:I-13 [Bates Numbers 1-13]).

nni-marbure.de/religionswissenschafVjournal/mjr/kent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. ,

On February 18, 1982, Scientology issued a document called a "Suppressive Person Declare," in which the organization charged Annstrong with an array of"crimes" against it. This declaration made him a target (called 'fair game') ofthe organization's operatives, since a suppressive person could be "tricked, cheated, lied to, or destroyed'" (quoted in Breckenridge, 1984b:13 [Bates 2374]).

During an altercation with Scientology (which occurred after the organization obtained, under exceedingly questionable circumstances, Arrnstrong's wedding-ceremony-and-celebration photographs thathe was trying to sell), someone in the organization refused to return the photos and told him to get an attorney. As a result ofthis incident, combined with what he knew about the organization's aggression toward perceived enemies, Annstrong "became terrified and feared that his life and the life ofhis wife were in danger, and he also feared that he would be the target ofcostly and harassing lawsuits" (Breckenridge, 1984b: 14 [Bates Number 2375]). He engaged a lawyer, and from Garrison he obtained numerous copies ofitems that he felt he might need in order to defend himselfin the anticipated legal proceedings.

As expected, around this time the physical assaults and harassment began. Armstrongwas:

being followed and surveilled by individuals who admitted employmentby [the Church ofScientology of California]; being assaulted by one ofthese individuals; being struck bodily by a car driven by one ofthese individuals; having two attempts by said individuals to involve Defendant Arrnstrong in a freeway automobile accident; having said individuals come onto Defendant Armstrong'sproperty, spy in his windows, create disturbances, and upset his neighbors (Breckenridge, 1984b: 14-15 [Bates Numbers 2375-2376]).

When the Church ofScientology and Hubbard's wife, Mary Sue Hubbard, sued Arrnstrong for the documents' return, a California court rejected the suit and even awarded Arrnstrong court costs (Breckenridge, 1984a).

The decision was a serious blow for the organization. Damaging documents had slipped out ofthe organization's control, and the presiding judge used his decision to issue a damning indictment ofthe organization. In an attempt, therefore, to discredit Annstrong, Scientology devised an entrapment scheme against him that proved to be very successful. A Scientology agent contacted Annstrong under the pretense that he represented a "loyalist" faction within Scientology that wanted to oust currentleadership and reform the organization from within. Seeking Annstrong's help in planning how.to carry out this supposed plot, the agent arranged a series ofmeetings with other supposed "loyalists" so that they could talk strategy. Unbeknownst to Annstrong, a private investigator taped the meetings. Armstrong brainstorrned a number ofpossible ways that the "loyalists" could use to down current leaders, including the creation ofofficial-looking documents that they could introduce as authentic within the organization's communications channels. Arrnstrong also indicated

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschait ·..mallmjrlkent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg' Journal ofReligion (January 2001) A. 1 t :»

that he was in touch with the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, in which crucial people were also eager to speak with the "loyalists" about alleged abuses ofthose in power. Scientology, inturn, published a heavily edited transcripttwith many deletions and interpretations) ofthe video tape in its public relations newspaper, Freedom (Church ofScientology, 1985).

By 1986, Annstrong was part ofa large lawsuit by former members against the organization. The lawyer for this suit, Michael Flynn, eventuaJly brokered a deal with Scientology that gave each ofhis clients a substantial amount ofmoney (in Annstrong's case, US $800,000.00) after all of them, individually, signed settlement agreements with the organization. The meaning of settlement agreement is at the heart ofthe current speech restrictions that Annstrong now contests.

The document thatAnnstrong signed (on December 6, 1986) was entitled, "Mutual Release ofAll Claims and Settlement Agreement." Armstrong agreed to dismiss the lawsuit thatFlynn was litigatingonhis behalf. He also agreed, "no further claims out ofhis experience with, or actions by, the Releasees [i.e., various Scientology organizations and people], from thebeginning oftime to and including thedate hereof, which may now exist or which may exist in the future may be asserted by him or on his behalf, against the Releasees" (Mutual Agreement, 1986: 6). Both parties, agreed, moreover, "thatin the .event of future litigation between Plaintiff[Annstrong] and any ofthe organizations.Individuals, or entities either alleged in this lawsuit or activity similar in fact to the evidence that was developed during the course ofthis lawsuit, will not be used by either party against the other in any future litigation. In other words, the 'slate' is wiped clean concerning past actions by any party" (Mutual Agreement, 1986: 11). Indeed, this interpretation about mutual silence concerning the other party seems to be the interpretation given by an attorney, Lawrence E. Helier, who had been involved (on Scientology's behalf) in the settlement agreement negotiations:

[t]he universal settlement provided for non-disclosure ofall facts underlying the litigation as well as non disclosure ofthe terms ofthesettlements themselves. The non-disclosure obligations were a key part ofthe settlement agreements insisted upon by all parties involved.

4. The contractual non-disclosure provisions the one issue which was not debated by any ofthe parties or attorneys involved. In the last two and onehalf(2-1/2) years the settlements have been carriedout in good faith by all parties (HelIer, 1989: 2 [Bates No. 2472]). \ Annstrong, therefore, thought that his battle withScientology was over, and that he the adversary to which he once had devoted his life would forever remain silent about each another. He was completely mistaken, as, apparently, was Helier about both parties honouring the non-disclosure terms ofthe settlement agreement.

·//nntnll )8/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

According to documents Armstrong filed in the California Court ofAppeal, Scientology's statements against him continued less than a year after all parties signed an agreement that should have 'wiped the slate clean' concerning Annstrong's previous actions againstthe organization. Armstrong protested that Scientology attacked an account ofhis RPF experiences ina "dead agent" pack (i.e., a collection ofcharacter assassination materials) designed to discredit sourcesused.by fonner-member-turned-critical-author, Bent Corydon. Also in 1987, Scientology labelled Armstrong as "an admitted agent provocateur ofthe U.S. Federal Government...." Similar allegations (that seem to misrepresent Annstrongand presumably should have been covered by the non disclosure agreement) also appeared in a 1991 Scientology court submission in a case involving the United States Internal Revenue Service (Armstrong, 1993: 12-16, Bates Numbers 3578-3581). Most importantly (Armstrong stated), Scientology also included "dead agent"/character assassination statements in its documentation to the Internal Revenue Service as it gathered information leading to its decision to grant the organization charitable status in 1993 (Annstrong, 1997: 110).

While it is true that Annstrong violated the non-disclosure agreement, even Scientology indicates that he did so only beginning in 1990 (Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County ofMarin, 1995a: 2), which is several years after the organization appears to have violated the agreement against him (and bydoing so repeatedly, possibly invalidated it).

In one ofthe more remarkable (and successful) arguments that the Church ofScientology made to the court, it insisted that the "Mutual Release ofAll and Settlement Agreement" did not legally prohibit Scientology from speaking about or against Annstrong: "[t]he Agreement, however, does not contain any such provision which imposes such an obligation on theChurch....'J According to this interpretation (as submitted by Scientology's attorneys), Armstrong was silenced; Scientology was not(SuperiorCourt ofthe State of California for the County ofMarin, 1995b: 7, Bates Number 9440). Iftrue, then it is difficult to understand what the word, "mutual," means in the "Mutual Release ... and Settlement Agreement" that both parties signed. Apparently it does not mean what clearly states: "In other words, the 'slate' is wiped clean concerning past actions by any party" (Mutual Agreement, 1986: 11).

While the case raises serious questions, once again,aboutScientology's alleged abuse ofthe legal system (see, for example, 1992; Stewart, 1980), it has particular significance for Europeans, since the Church of Scientology International alleges that several ofArmstrong's breaches ofthe mutual agreement took place in Germany. According to a document that an for Scientology filed in December 1997, additional agreement violations occurred when Annstrongspoke to German media and government officials:

23. I am informed and believe that Annstrong flew to Berlin, Germany sometime in October, where he gave a

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft.. :maVmjrlkent2.htrnl 18/08/2003 Marburg'Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. -" "

speech on or about October 26, 1997. In that speech, Annstrong violated the Injunction numerous times by inter alia, making statements about Ron Hubbard and complaining that the Church is misusing the U.S. legal system and blaming the Church, the U.S. legal system, and even his ownattorney for the fact that a contempt citation and arrest warrant has been issued against him (Wi1son, 1997: 5).

Attorney Andrew H. Wilson continues by complaining that he "gavean interview to the Berliner Zeitung, and that in Hamburg "he appeared at an eventsponsored by self-styled 'anti-cults' Renate Rennenbach sic] and Ursula Caberta" (Wilson 1997: 6). (Rennebach is an SPD member ofthe German Parliament, and Caberta directs the Hamburg government's monitoring and information agency on Scientology).

About these officials, Wilson offered:

Rennenbach and Caberta have been engaged for the past several years in attempts to discredit the Church through various means and have lobbied various German government entities to essentially legalize discrimination against members ofthe Church ofScientology because oftheir Church membership. In fact, Germany has been censored for the past three years by the United Nations and the Helsinki Commission for just such discrimination. The United States Department ofState has also found a pattern ofhuman rights abuses by Germany against Church members (Wilson, 1997: 6).

Finally, Wilson complained about Armstrong's appearances on German television (Wilson, 1997: 6).

To Europeans, however, this entire affair against Annstrong looks exceedingly bad for Scientology, regardless ofthe eventual disposition ofthe California arrest warrants and court case. (Indeed, in late December 2000, the disposition ofScientology's legal action against Annstrong took a dramatic turn when a new judge on the case refused [at least until a full hearing] to grant Scientology's motion to hold him in contempt ofcourt ([Klien, 2000]). The statements that Scientology made about Annstrong soon after all parties signed a mutual agreement appear to be the type ofcharacter assassination that the group has a reputation for using against perceived enemies whose usually truthful statements paint the group in an unfavourable light. Observers ofthis case may see Armstrong's decision to speaking out again about Hubbard and Scientology as an attempt to defend his dignity in face ofserious misrepresentations about his character and actions. Indeed, the Germans, the organization's retaliation against Armstrong for speaking in their country only credence to his claim that Scientology "is misusing the V.S. legal system" (Wilson, 1997: 5).

PAGES

11) Conclusion: Scientology-An International Social Movement and its Opposition httn·llwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/kent2.html 18108/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

Observing the complexities ofthe European human rights debate about Scientology, social scientists attempt to identify patterns ofbehaviour that both explain the actions ofthe participants at the same time that they advance the development and application oftheory. Particularly fruitful is an analysis ofScientology as an internatiorial social movement that has developed a significant political ally-the United States government-in its efforts to acquire and disperse resources in Europe and elsewhere. Asa transnational entity, Scientology is a global player attempting to gain strategic worldwide advantages for its marketing aspirations. Its major goal is to implement "its founder's ideas, moral values, and social structural vision throughout the internationalscene" (Kent, 1999a: 148). Indeed, Scientology fits the definition ofa transnational social movement very closely, since it involves "sustained contentious interactions with opponents-national or non-national-by connected networks of challengers organized across national boundaries" (Tarrow, 1998: 184).

Most useful about a transnational social movement perspective on the Franco-German versus American Scientology debate is that it allow us to view Scientology'sefforts to represent itselfas a religion suffering human rights violations as an international lobbying strategy. Social scientists who study international social movements call this lobbying strategy a "strategic frame," since it attempts to legitimate and motivate collective action by creating a shared understanding ofissues-in this case within the widely accepted discourse ofhuman rights (McCarthy, 1997: 244-245).

Indeed, the analysis ofScientology's creation and perpetuation ofthis "religious" human rights framing strategy provides new insight for social scientists. Thisinsight has particular salience for researchers who are attempting to develop and refine theoretical constructs about how social movements occasionally align themselves with governments in attempts to advance their positions in resistive or hostile nationsIsee Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 12-13). Moreover, this analysis ofScientology's strategic framing has direct and immediate implications for the social policy debates about "sects" or "cults" that are raging between France, Germany, Belgium, and the United States, particularly regarding Scientology.

As a strategic matter, Scientology's success in so-called "core states"-i.e., states that have strong governments, vibrant national cultures, great resources (see .Wallerstein, 1974: 349)-- has the biggest payofffor the organization. These core states or countries-which include the United States, several ofthe larger and financially influential European countries, and probably Japan-possess the greatest wealth, have the most developed domestic and international commercial and politicalnetworks, and provide the most opportunities to acquire resources for an organization. Without question, the most powerful ofthese core countries is the United States, where Scientology has headquarters for several ofits key organizations and operations.

Among many important aspects ofthe current debate between France and Germany versus the United States is

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafti mallmjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) A. Ui I..J

that all three countries are, more-or-less, core states. Each government, therefore, is contributing considerable resources to this debate; and the potential benefits or demerits for Scientology are significant. Thestakes are . high because these core states have their own social, political, and economic spheres ofinfluence and connections in the world system. Consequently, decisions that each country makes regarding Scientology will impact the degree ofdifficulty that the organization encounters when attempting to enter countries (such as ones in the former Communist bloc) within those respective spheres and connections.

As we know from sociological analyses ofsocial movement/countermovement operations within the borders of single nations, important aspects ofa social movement's efforts to acquire resources also involve its simultaneous efforts to deny resource access its opponents (Kent, 1990; Kriesberg, 1997: 15). Generally speaking, these efforts involve defining opponents as either intolerably criminal or intolerably deviant (Kent, 1990: 404-408). Consequently, social movements may portray their opponents as violating well-respected laws or performing undefendable crimes. As we already know, Scientology, in its globalized social movement campaign, uses these tactics (and more) against the official bodies and individuals who oppose them, accusing their opponents ofintolerance, bigotry, and religious human rights violations. Scientology's representatives and spokespersons propagate these accusations while addressing some ofthe most influentialand powerful organizations in Western Europe and the United States. '

11.1) International Social Movements and Domestic Organizations

Analysts ofinternational social movements are aware that domestic governmental organizations dealing primarily or exclusively with issues inside ofcountries nevertheless can have impact on transnational debates (see Kriesberg, 1997: 16). Sometimes this impact can occur because these domestic organizations are interested in, or have jurisdiction over, issues that have global importance. Increasingly for many European nations, for example, governmental rulings on domestic issues must ,align themselves with the laws oflarger, international bodies (like the European Parliament the European Court ofHuman Rights). '

In Germany, the activities of its domestic 'constitutional security police,' who monitor potential threats to the German constitution, became a target ofScientology's discrimination claims (Cowell, 1997: 6), and one constitutional police officer even createda minor international incident whenhe gotcaught conducting an investigation on Swiss soil Zeitung, 1999; Walsroder Zeitung, 1999). A domestic organization within the French government blockedScientology organizations from receiving from foreign sources, and this effort resulted in a precedent-setting decision (that Scientology won) in the European Court ofJustice (European Court ofJustice, 2000). As I continue, therefore, to identify the transnational behaviour ofthe Scientology social movement, we must not neglect how its interactions with domestic governmental and non-

.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

governmental agencies impact its worldwide

By far the most important example ofa domestic organization making a decision that had international implications for Scientology was the agreementthat it entered into with America's Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 1993. This agreementgranted tax exempt charitable status to the Church ofScientology International and its affiliate organizations in the US. Whatever may have been the merits ofScientology's case, the organization's promise to ca1l6ff2,300 lawsuits againstthe federal department likely was a factor in the favourabledecision that it The legal history ofbattles between Scientology and the IRS sent a clear message that this organization was fully prepared to cost the federal government tens ofmillions of additional dollars in legal costs and stafftime. It probably would not be accurate to say that Scientology's threat oflitigation was the primary reason that the IRSturnedits back on tax courtdecisions (about the taxable nature ofthe organization [see United States Claims Court, 1992] and granted it charitable, tax exempt status, but certainly it was on the minds ofIRS officials.

One ofthe numerous Scientology organizations to receive the tax exemptdesignation was the International Association ofScientologists, and the tax exempt money that flowed into it had international implications for the organization. In the language ofsocialmovements theory, the International Association ofScientologists served as a "foundation" for the Scientology social movement, collecting resources through membership donations and funnelling the money into various social movement projects (such as newspaper ads against Germany, funded in part by its British affiliate [see Kent, 1999a: 158 and n. 27]). Charitable status tothis group and others was invaluable tothe overall Scientology organization, and the IRS action ofmailing notification of the decision to governments around theworld (along with some organizationally provided publications) may have been unprecedented. Deliberately or not, one ofAmerica's most formidable domestic governmental agencies had turned intoan international Scientology booster. Assistance in understanding this 'boosterism' comes from traditional social movements theory.

Earlier social movement literature distinguished between 'adherents,' who were organizations or people who believed in the goals ofa social movement, and 'constituents,' who were organizations or people (not necessarily adherents) who provided resources for it (McCarthy and Zald, 1977: 1221). More recent literature realizes that national political authorities can become constituents for international social movements by providing resources for their efforts (Mcflarthy, 1997: 253). Along these lines, one usefulway to view the IRS decision is that it transformed the United States government from an opponent to a constituent, and the payoffs to Scientology resulting from this transformation were immediate. As a registered American-based charity, Scientology's treatment in other countries became an issue for the Department ofState. Consequently, the first mention of Scientology's alleged discrimination in Germany came in the State Department's annual human rights report for 1993, which it issuedon January 31, 1994-just four months after the IRS decision (United States Department of http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft. rnaUrnjr/kent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stp-'ien , ....

State, 1994: 12). Again in social movement language, Scientology now had an 'elite constituent' on its side-the United States government-which had become a core-state supporter with access to large amounts ofresources amongst world players.

11.2) American Domestic Cultural Trends That Facilitated Sclentology's Global Expansion Efforts

Scientology obtained its American charitable status at a period in American history that allowed it to benefit from several existing aspects ofAmerican culture (see Srnith.Pagnucco, and Chatfield, 1997: 70). I already mentioned, for example, how Scientology probablywas able to utilize the litigious nature ofAmerican society . to its own advantage in the IRS negotiations, althoughcritics would complain that, on this cultural dimension, Scientology has done much to create it (Blum, 1993; Home, 1992). During the mid-to-late 1990s, for example, it also used litigation to destroy the Cult Awareness Network, then obtain all the researchfiles that it owned. By . doing so Scientology silenced (and obtained the historically rich files of) an internationally-connected domestic critic that had been speaking out against it since 1974 (see Kent, 1999a: 152-153; and Krebs, 1998b: 40- 42; 1999: 23-24). American litigiousness, therefore, has served Scientology well, and it has proven to be an aggressively successful resource strategy.

In an age where information matters, and around issues (human rights and tolerance) where history helps inform the present, the achievement ofobtaining all the files ofone's enemy is a dramatic litigious reward. In essence, a social movement took over its major non-governmental domestic countermovement. With the original CAN's destruction, Scientology no longer had a high-profile non-governmental domestic critic with which to contend. When, therefore, Scientologists got into the corridors ofAmerican power with its cries ofpersecution and woe, no effective body existed to counteract their protests and their facts.

In addition to flourishing within America's litigious atmosphere, at least one other cultural trend has given the organization unique access to governmental elites and helped turn many ofthem into constituents. That trend involves the increasingly blurring lines between entertainment and politics-between Hollywood and Washington (Brownstein, 1990; Sherman, 1990). Connections between politicians and Hollywood celebrities go back for decades, and the relationship during the McCarthy era was tense. These relationships warmed again during the President John Kennedy's administration, since a brother-in-law, PeterLawford, was an actor, and Kennedy himselfdeveloped 'personal' relationships with various stars (including Frank Sinatra and Marilyn Monroe). Relationships strained again during the Vietnam War (with several prominent celebrities becoming vocal American critics), but certainly the election ofa former Hollywood leading man to the presidency in 1980 (Ronald Reagan) showed that any rift between actors and politicians had long since healed.

18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

President Bill Clinton (elected in 1992) was the firstbaby-boomer to be elected the White House who had grown up on American popular televison culture. He liked movies, and he liked movie stars. Many ofthem liked him too, and their mutual affection had enormous financial benefits in terms of financial contributions donations-first for the candidate and then the President. Indeed, all successful political aspirants, and many prominent politicians, have to make the pilgrimage 'movie-Mecca' for one reason-money.

Some movie stars have fabulous wealth-more than even they ever can use. Consequently, they have the discretion to devote sizeable chunks ofit tosocial and political causes (see Elving, 2000: 13), and by doing so receive some tax reliefagainst their enormous incomes. All the while, American political campaigns have become enormously costly, and only the wealthy-or at least those who socialize with them-can run for most federal positions. 'Schmoozing' with celebrities, therefore, has become a standard aspect ofAmerican political life.

In addition to wealth, celebrities also have blocks of(what social movement analysts call) 'discretionary time' time not tied down by obligations like regular jobs-which they candevote tocampaigning orany number of social causes (ifthey so choose [see McCarthy and Zald, 1977: 1224]). In addition to both wealth and discretionary time, movie stars have a commodity that politicians desperately want-the focus ofthe camera lens. The very nature ofwhat they do keeps celebrities in the limelight, and politicians, who are forever campaigning want and need as much attention (or at least positive attention) as they can attract.

It turns out that, since the 1950s, Scientology had programs in place that targeted celebrities. Hubbard realized their key roles as opinion-makers, so he envisioned their potential benefits as spokespersons on behalfof his organization (see Kent, 1999a: 153). By the early 1990s,when both popular and political cultures were blurring divisions between entertainment and politics, the heirs toHubbard were able to capitalize on the organization's celebrities as spokespersons before key governmental committees. Scientology's entertainment elitesmoved in some ofthe same social circles as the nation's political elites, in relationships that were, variously, symbiotic and parasitic. For the Scientology organization, however, these relationships were extremely valuable.

11.3) Crumbling Communism and Its.Effects on Scientology's Globalization Aspirations in The United States and Europe

Scientology gained its American charitable donation at a when the world was undergoing one ofthe pivotaltransformations in recent human history-the collapse ofCommunism. Directly impactingon the lives of hundreds ofmillions ofpeople, this recenttransformation has dramatic implications on all aspects ofthese people's lives. Certainly it is having revolutionary implications for religion, and in the long scope ofhistory it

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft. . mallmjrlkent2.html 18/0812003 2001) - MarburgJournal, ofReligion (January Kent, , A

may prove to be an event as transfonnative as was the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the rise of Communism (Wuthnow, 1980: 53-55). Regardlessoftheaccuracy ofScientology's religious claims, the fallof Communism even impacted it, although very differently in various countries.

In the United States, Scientology benefited both from Communism's collapse and from the effort to bring it down. By the time Scientology received its tax exemption, evangelical Christians (and perhaps even some Mormons) were working with the State Department and other government agencies (see Gottlieb and Wiley, 1984: 88-90), hoping to see 'godless Communism' collapse so that new mission fields would open for their faith (s). It is likely that the origins ofthe Evangelicals' concern fort'religious tolerance"came from the barriers (sometimes with murderous results) that Christians encountered when trying to proselytize in some countries (Shea, 1997). The model oftolerance, however, that the Evangelicals and the Department advanced was an especially American one (see SuIlivan, 1999), which assumed (ifnot demanded) laissez-faire attitudes by governments even as the religious groups themselves often resembled American business enterprises.

Following a tradition of"established civil religion," these Evangelicals, along with other State Department officials, believed "that the present American order is good and ought to be universal, and cover the whole of humanity, dominating the world for the sake ofits own salvation" (Betsworth, 1980: 10; see Kent and Spickard, 1994: 374-382; Ribuffo, 1998). Perhaps theycould afford to be tolerant, since Communism's collapse proved (if to them it ever needed proving) that their vision ofgodliness would win out over time. In any case, Scientology's charitable status gave secular sanctification to its religious claims, but opposition to these claims in France and Germany allowed it to join in the chorus with many Christian organizations that wailedabout their foreign oppression.

Europeans experienced the collapse ofCommunism in ways that were deeply personal. Americans watched Communism die, but Europeans suffered (still more) amidst its decline. As Communist political and social institutions withered, few new institutions were there to replace them, at least at first. These institutions, however, were coming, sometimes quickly, as both businesses and religions (not to mention organized crime) realized what opportunities existed. Indeed, what seems to have gotten Scientology identified as a business rather.than a religion in Germany was that some German Scientologists engaged in questionable business practices during the early 1990s in fundraising efforts needed to fuel their organization's financial push into Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Greece, and especially Albania (Haag, 19.92; WISE International, 1993).

Realizing the potentially lucrative markets that were opening, Scientologymobilized German members ofits business community to fund business projects in these new geographical locations, through its economic division called World Institute ofScientology Enterprises (or simply, WISE). In order to meet these demands,

httn:/Iwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjrlkent2.htrnl 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Steohen A.

some Scientologists got involved in flipping newly purchased apartments into condos, thereby allowing them to force the former apartment dwellers to what previously they had rented (and to do so at exorbitant prices [Whitney, 1994; see Kent, 1999b: 10]). Complaints to German politicians, however, led to the discovery of the Scientology connection to the widely criticized practice,and the group's image as an abusive business took hold. In essence, by Scientology trying to mobilize German financial resources for a push into newly opened countries by its financial ann, the organization permanently destroyed any hope that Germangovernment officials might accept its religious claims.

11.4) Mobilizing the International Community

Having received its coveted charitable status the US while encountering stiffopposition to effortsto receive comparable designations in countries like Germany and France, Scientologists enacted a mobilization strategy that took advantage ofthat American status. Put simply, it elicited help from its most celebrated elite constituent, the US government, for pressuring nationally operating governmental and non-governmental organizations-along with international governmental and non-governmental organizations--into accepting Scientology's religious claims. At the same time, the American government pressured itsEuropean colleagues to interpret existing human rights regulations in a permissive, laissez-faire manner (as does the American government toward Scientology in its own land).

Through the example ofthe Internal Revenue Service, we already have seen how actions even by domestic governmental organizations can have significant international human rights consequences. too, can actions with or against domestic non-governmental organizations (such as original CAN) have transnational consequences. More direct and certain, however are thepayoffs when a group lobbying on human rights issues wins over to its cause nationally operating governmental organizations dealing with human rights issues. These organizations will include courts, taxation commissions, agencies that review tax status, federal human rights agencies, etc. The problem forScientology, ofcourse, as it heightened its campaign for religious recognition in France and Germany is that both countries had confrontational histories the organization that dated back into the 1970s. Governmental bodies that 'dealt with issues affecting human rights were extremely reluctant to grant Scientology the status that it demanded, and Germany's recent experience ofScientologists' bullying business behaviours inrental/condo markets during the early made such recognition all but impossible. French society, moreover, had been stunned by the Solar Temple murder/suicides, so it was very wary of a group that might have dangerous or fanatical tendencies. '

As often happens, however, in human rights debates when parties inside countries cannot achieve the 'justice' to which they feel entitled (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: European Scientology went to the government of

hun://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. Vi 1_'

another country-not surprisingly the US-to apply external pressure on France and Germany. Scientology has a policy (called the "Special Zone Plan")for members about bringing organizations in one's sphere ofinfluence into alignment with Scientology (Hubbard,1976: 489), and on an organizational level it certainly did that with the American government. The strategies that it used to bring about this alignment were multifold and, for the most part, effective. Older social movement literature identified instances where the American government formally and informally assistedsocial movements inside the country (McCarthy andZald, 1973: 13), and now we have a clear example ofit facilitating the goals of-an international social movement .on a global scale.

As do many professional socialmovements (and, for that matter, transnational corporations [Barnet and Cavanagh, 1994: 345, 346]), Scientology hired professional lobbyists in the centre ofAmerican power- Washington, D.e. These lobbyists had professional and social contacts, and they had knowledge about the operation ofgovernment departments in that complex city. Apparently the lobbyists targeted committees and organizations that were nationally operating bodies and that dealt with internationalhuman rights issues. The bodies and offices about which we have extensive documentation are the House International Relations Committee, the Helsinki Commission, State Department.spokespersons, the President's National Security Advisor (Sandy Berger [Young, 1998: 138]). the officials serving these institutions and roles, the lobbyists arranged meeting-opportunities for Scientology's entertainment elite, and these officials welcomed the stars. Even ifthey had wantedto opposing voices, after the demise orthe original CAN, such voices were difficult to locate and had no lobbying presence.

As these American governmental bodies translated Scientology's complaints into speeches, reports, and policies, they had a repertoire ofstrategies open to them in their attempts to get countries like France, Germany, and Belgium to comply. These strategies included informal diplomatic conversations, diplomatic pressure, and economic or political sanctions. Regarding France, Germany, and (it seems) Belgium, the tactic that American governmental officials used most often was shame-a common technique in what social scientists call "accountability tactics" (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 24). Allegations that these governments were religious human rights abusers embarrassed the Europeans, and time they compounded. After each American government report made such a claim, other agencies and the media picked up on it.

Scientology, in would protest even louder, yet the irony about the growing outcry over abuse and intolerance is that Scientology manufactured--fabricated--some ofthe information thatkept the allegations alive. By faking a scenario ofbusiness discrimination because ofa person's Scientology membership in Germany (Kruttschnitt, Nuebel, and Schweitzer, 2000), Scientology undertook a very risky resource mobilization strategy. The goal ofthis strategy was to create sympathy for its members and outrage against a target enemy by manufacturing victimization. In the short term it worked; but (as happens so often with manufactured events) the media eventually exposed it for what it was. Remarkably, the American government httn://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumaVmjrlkent2.html 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) KentStr--hen A. .

has not seemed react to having been deceived.

PAGE 10

11.5) Think-Tanks and Lobbyists

In addition to support from various Americangovemmental bodies that dealt with humanright issues, Scientology received additional support from various think-tank and international lobbying bodies. Think-tanks provide ideas and justify policies forsocial movements. Often they combine science and ideology to provide information that supports the social movement's position while discrediting enemies or opponents. They also provide locations (now including web sites) where social movements leave written records ofthe issues at stake, framed in the manner that those movements want others to adopt (see Alger, 1997: 263; McCarthy, 1997: 246). Frequently think-tanks have staffwho serve as lobbyists for the social movementby presenting their findings to regulatory and policy-making bodies.

Often members ofthese think-tanks are social movement members (or adherents), but they need not be. They only need to be constituents-people who provide resources to a social movement-for them to play valuable legitimating roles. They can be constituents for any number ofreasons, but most likely they are either 'conscience constituents' who agree with at least the broad dimensions ofthe social movement but who will not benefit from their achievement (McCarthy and Zald, 1977: 1222), or 'paid constituents' who provide their services for a fee but who will not otherwise benefit. While varioustypes ofconstituent lobbyists may exist on any given issue, in the international human rights debate about Scientology the group that stands out mostly clearly as an example is CESNUR, possibly accompanied by Human Rights Without Frontiers.

It is easy to confuse constituent-support for member endorsement, which may have happened when French intelligence networks told MILS that Karen Lord might be a Scientologist. While she was a constituent to Scientology's claims aboutEuropean persecution, she likely maintained her own faith. Similarly, Massimo Introvigne presumably maintains his own.faith even though he strives to legitimize Scientology's allegations about its members suffering religious human rights violations. Speculation about constituents' motives may provide useful knowledge (as occurs researchers determine that they are adherents), but in a resource mobilization analysis it often matters less why constituents provide resources than that fact that they do it at all.

CESNUR is increasingly important or the international stage. Introvigne intrials andhearings around the world, and the organization's conferences attract scholars and occasionallywell-positioned human rights staff. Introvigne also serves on editorial boards for academic journals studying religion, so his influence is wide. Indeed, he aptly represents an observation that social movement theorists made, which was, n ••• professionals http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft 1810812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. 1

such as lawyers and scholars, whether or notthey are affiliated with a movement organization, often play important roles in advancing ofthe movement or in focussing efforts ofthe movementon specific policy prescriptions" (Smith, Pagnucc,and Chatfield, 1997: 61). In the context, therefore, ofthedebate over ' Scientology in France and Germany, CESNURis athink-tankand lobbying group, attempting to advance Scientology's legitimation goals byinfluencing European and American governmental policies towardit. It is not a neutral academic association, even less so because on its web page Introvigne intermingles ideological positions within solid research and information (see Martinez [compiler], 2000). On issues, however, that are key to the religious human rights debates-apostates, brainwashing, undue influence, compromised academic research, 'sect' membership and the potential for harm, critical information exchange on the Internet, etc.-he advocates doctrinaire positions that favour groups like Scientology.

11.6) Appeals to International Governmental Bodies and International Governmental Organizations

Conceptually (in terms ofresource potential), American governmental pressure comes at European governments laterally, and it comes upward from national non-governmental organizations. Because offledging attempts at dissolving European however, criticism conceivably may come from above. The European Union, the European Parliament, the Council ofEurope, and the European Court ofHuman Rights have the power to pressure (and in some cases force) France, Germany, and Belgium to change their laws. In theory, too, critical comments from the United Nations would hold the weight ofmoral suasion and put tremendous pressure on those countries. It is unlikely, however, that Scientology has anywhere the same ease ofaccess to officials in these international organizations that it does to key players in the American government, and on those grounds alone Scientology's protestations do not receive so ready an audience. In July 1987, it did successfully lobby twelve members ofthe Council ofEurope's Parliamentary Assembly to introduce a motion about religious freedom, but the motion was combined with another one and quickly forgotten (Richardson, 1995: 55).

International bodies have been willing to examine some ofScientology's complaints, but they have not been deaf to the positions ofGermany and France. Scientology has referred, successfully, one French issue to the European Court ofJustice, and saw ofits complaints published in a report by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in early 1994 (United Nations Commission on Human Rights, 1994). The UN Report, however, also summarized Germany's position, and in 1998 a special investigator called Scientology's charges ofNazi tactics by the government "meaningless and puerile'" (quoted in New York Times, 1998). Moreover, the Council ofEurope's Parliamentary Assembly recomm-ended the establishment (or support of) governmentally-funded sect information centres, much like the ones that run in Belgium, Austria, and France (Council ofEurope, 1999). Taken together, these international governmental and judicial bodies are attempting to address issues in a less judgmental way than do many ofthe organizations affiliated with the American government. Scientology, however, will not be able to countenance the Council ofEurope's position, httn:/Iwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stenhen A.

so inevitably more Europeanconflictover sect or 'cult'observatories lies ahead. Having destroyed America's largest domestic enemy--the original CAN, Scientology is bitterly opposed any European watchdogs, especially ones that have state protection.

It is not clear, however, whether Scientology lobbying against these monitoring agencies on the level of European or global interstate governments will effective. Already, for example, in late April 1999, representatives from countries within the fifteen-member European Federation ofCenters for Research and Information on Sectarianism (F.E.C.R.I.S .) metin Paris and passed a resolution that they "are united in fighting the effects ofadverse sectarian practices and to assist the victims ofsuch practices" (European Federation of Centers for Research and Informationon Sectarianism, 1999). Only time will tell whether these (often poorly funded) organizations coalesce into a formidable and authoritative European voice.

11.7) Additional Countermovement Efforts

Unconvinced by Scientology's religious claims and its cries ofpersecution, French and German officials have responded in a number ofways. They have refused to grant tax concessions; they have written critical reports; and they have placed the group under varying degrees ofscrutiny (including raids in France and Belgium, and monitoring by the government's constitutional police in Germany), Moreover, as the Parliamentary Assembly intended, at least some ofthe sect observatories exchange information on a regular basis. The German ambassador turns down invitations to appear before congressionalhearings on the 'plight'ofScientology in his country (probably for unstated reasons ofdiplomatic protocol), but he sends written statements and/or letters. Growing frustration among these European officials the inability ofAmerican counterparts to appreciate their critical position against the group has led to moments ofreal international tension.

PAGE If

11.8) Counter-Opposition and the Internet

Even more consequential than official position papers and media stories against Scientology is the opposition to it on the Internet. Indeed, the Internet is 'proving to be the Achilles' heel ofScientology. Because human rights battles almost always involve efforts to document and disseminate reliable information (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 28), the dissemination potential ofthe Internet in these battles.jncluding the one over Scientology, is staggering. Some governments opposed toScientology already are using it effectively. The government of Bavaria, for example, posts its official statements about Scientology in both English and German languages, and MILS posts many ofits reports. But the most relentless opposition to Scientology comes through countless persons who are countermovement constituent-adherents against it (see Peckham, 1998). http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft.. . nal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, hen A. •

Although different interpretations are possible the Internet opposition to Scientology, one promising perspective is to examine it as ifit were "a transnational advocacy network'i-that is, an Internet-linked, information-sharing, "network ofactivists, distinguishable largely by the centrality ofprincipled ideas or values in motivating [its] formation" (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 1).No formal organization exists; no central coordination directs activities; and at most.the network cangenerate collective action (such as occasionalpickets-ofScientology facilities). People in this network are volunteers, but some have invested hundreds ofhours in efforts to disseminate information against Scientology and its claims about religious human rights abuses. The ori-going information source oh Scientology is the news group, . In addition,people have developed dozens ofweb sites containing Scientology information. Web often specialize on particular aspects ofScientology, and they always link to others that have complementary information.

As well, many kinds ofspecialtyservices against Scientology are emerging, with web sites containing unique information collections perhapsbeing the most important. Germany's Tilman Hausherr, for example, has constructed a list of"frequently asked questions" about Scientology in Germany along with another on academics (whom he calls 'cult apologists') who (he believes) support Scientology and other controversial groups. Ofenormous importance for English-speakers is an unofficial German-to-Englishtranslation service provided by Joe Cisar, which includes hundreds ofmedia articles along with key govemrnentalreports. Similarly, Roger Gonnet ofFrance provides somewhat ofa similar service for important French language information. Mark Bunker places on the Internet copies ofimportant television videos alongwith tapes from various events, and JeffJacobsen digitizes key documents and reports. Rod Keller does a weekly news summary on , and Kristi Wachter provides dailyhistorical information. Probably the most extensive collection ofcriticalScientology material appears in the "Operation Clambake" web site run by Norway's Andreas Heldal-Lund. In the language ofsocial science, these people are "[n]onstate actors [who] gain influence by serving as alternate sources of information" (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 19). Seen in total, the content and amount ofmaterial, most of it negative, about Scientology on the Internet poses a global threat to the organization's legitimation claims, and Scientologyhasbeen able to curtail only a small amount ofthis information staying in cyberspace (see Peckham, 1998).

Earlier! suggested that CESNUR appears to be a conservative Catholic think-tank and lobbying group that concerns itselfwith the claims of alleged abuses that Scientology and other controversial groups bring forward. An important aspect ofthis apparent concern is its prominence on the World Wide Web. It attempts to be the web site to which people turn when they want information on a variety ofglobal issues related to 'new religions' and their battles over religious freedom inEurope and elsewhere. The more information it has (and the CESNUR site is quite large), the more likely web search engines will pull it from the pack as an appropriate site to visit. Amidst its useful information, however, CESNUR includes material that departs from academics and

httn://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Steohen A.

enters polemics. It reproduces full texts ofarticles that reinforce its ideology, and downplays or neglects positions that challenge its orthodoxy. Nevertheless, CESNUR has become a formidable web presence, yet it stilI cannot compensate for the sheer volume ofless favourable Scientology material that others have posted elsewhere.

What hinders the Internet from having a devastating impact on Scientology's claims to be a victim ofreligious discrimination is that the cyber-community, as an advocacy network, does not have access to the same powerful committees and politicians that Scientology does. Moreover, perhaps because Scientology's self-produced material about its persecution plight is so convincing, orperhapspolitical elites do not trust the accuracy of the Internet, persons in power seem not availingthemselves ofthe wealth offree material that is only a few mouse- clicks away.

11.9) An Emerging Countermovement Organization: The Lisa McPherson Trust

Without an effective lobbying presence in Washington, Scientology's opponents may never get their information to the decision-makers who need it. The advent, however, ofan organization specifically opposing Scientology only metres away from some of its Clearwater, Florida facilities is the Lisa McPherson Trust (established January 6,2000). The organization's name follows a pattern often seen in human rights battles, where advocates ofa particular position rally around "powerful symbolic events" (Keck and Sikkink, 1998: 22). McPherson's death is such an event, since it occurred after she had been in the 'care' ofScientologists in one of their facilities for seventeen days while she apparently suffered a psychotic breakdown. In critics' minds, her treatment and death have come to symbolize all that is wrong with Scientology, and therefore the counter organization named itselfin her memory. Founded by Robert Minton, who joined the battle against Scientology after learning on the Internet about Scientology's efforts to silence critics, he has spent millions ofdollars ofhis own money in a concerted effort to curb what he and others believe are Scientology's human rights abuses.

It remains to be seen, however, what long-term impact the Lisa McPherson Trust has as a countermovement organization. Many innovative contributions to the Internet come from people associated with the organization, but its geographical location in Florida limit its ability to become the sustained lobbying force that the countermovement needs. Moreover, it lacks the kind ofprofessional stature that CESNURhas, since it does not run academic conferences and its key players do not have extensive professional credentials. Nevertheless, it is networking with oppositional movements in France, Germany, and elsewhere. its part, Scientology is sufficiently worried about it that it has tried to stifle its activities as well as the ofHamburg's Scientology sect-monitor, Ursula Caberta when she visited the Trust late in the Summer of 2000 (Hamburger Morgenpost, 2000).

18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) A.

All indications are that this battle over Scientology's claims ofhuman rights violations against it will continue for a long time. French and German governments show no signs ofcapitulating to American pressure. Meanwhile, three long-time congressional defenders ofScientology's reputed plight in Europe--Matt Salmon, Donald Payne, and BenjaminGilman--introduced another House resolution (referred to the Committee on International Relations) which said that the United States House ofRepresentatives "disapproves of the growing intolerance, discrimination, and violence directed against individuals and groups because oftheir religion or belief." It singled out Austria, Belgium, France, and Germany as countries where intolerance is flourishing, and named the lehovah's Witnesses, Southern Baptists, Unificationists [i.e., Moonies], Monnons,Opus Dei, and Scientology (among others) as victimized groups. It then called on the President and the Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedomto raise the issueofthis (supposed) intolerance as often as possible. Finally, and perhaps most interestingly, the resolution called for inclusion ofexperts on religious liberty" to be included in "United States delegations to appropriate meetings of international organizations, including the OSCE" (House ofRepresentatives, 2000). Notsurprisingly, the Committee on International Relations unanimously passed the item (OTS, 2000). Meanwhile, one ofUtah's Senators, Orrin Hatch (R.), spoke out against France and Germany, and indicated thatthe persecution that his faith-Mormonism-suffered, sensitized him to theScientologists' situation in those two countries (Canterathe, 2000).

It remains apparent that Hatch and other key figures in the American government continue to misunderstand the very basic reasons why European countries like France and Germany (and probably Belgium and Austria) remain steadfast in their opposition to Scientology and controversial ideologies. Scientology's successful IRS settlement and its destruction ofitsinfonnation-providing critic(the old Cult Awareness Network) have given the organization little opposition in its national lobbying efforts. Consequently, poorly informed officials cannot view the reactions to Scientology by French and German officials outside ofa narrow, mythologized context ofAmerican religious freedom issues (Sullivan,1999:2. They are unable to realize that international opposition to Scientology in Europe may not represent violations ofreligious human rights but instead may signify efforts to protect citizens from an organization whose alleged human rights violations against its own members appear to be systematic and

BIBLIOGRAPHY .

\ AFP [Agence France Presse]. 1998. "Enquete Commission Solicits Understanding for the Perspective Towards Scientology-Bonn Delegation Struggles Against Prejudice in the USA." Downloaded from: on March3, 1998; Unofficial Translation by Joe Cisar.

httn://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/kent2.htm1 1810812003 MarburgJournal ofReligion (January 2001)Kent,Stp hen A. •

------. 1999a. "Controversial Church ofScientology Under Gun Belgium." (October 1); Downloaded from: on October 1, ' 1999: 1p. "

----. 1999b. "Les scientologues auraient infiltre l'Elyse e danslepasse, selon M. Vivien." (September 14); Downloaded from: on September 15, 1999): 1p.

------.2000. "French Assembly Approves Controversial Anti-Sect Bill." (June 22); Downloaded from: on June 22, 2000: 2pp.

Alger, Chadwick F. 1997. "Transnational Movements, World Politics, and Global Governance." In Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics. Edited by Jackie Smith, Charles Chatfield, and Ron Pagnucco. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse UniversityPress:

AlIard, Philippe. 1999. "Comment Combattre les Sectes?" Downloaded from: on September 16, 2000.

Anderson, Sue. 1980. "Honorary LRH PROs Around the World." LRH Personal PRO International (July 28): lpp. + 7pp.

A.R. (F). 1997. AFF.: Ministere Public..., "Appel d'unjugement du Tribunal de Grande.Instance de Lyon (13eme Chambre) du 22 novembre 1996 par les prevenus Jean JacquesMazier...." 4eme Chambre (Juillet 28).

Armstrong, Gerald. 1993. "Appellant's Opening Brief." Filed in The Court ofAppeal for the State ofCalifornia, Second Appellate District, Division Four. "Church ofScientology International vs. Gerald Armstrong." Los Angeles Superior Court No. BC 052395. (January 19): 49pp.; Bates Numbers 3566-3615. '

------. 1997. "Request for Extension to File Appellant's Brief." Submitted in California Court ofAppeal, First Appellate District; Division Four. "Church ofScientology International v, Gerald Armstrong." Appeal No. A075027, Marin County Superior Court No. 157680: 144pp.

Assemblee 2000."Proposition de Loi tendant arenforcer la preventionet la.repression l'encontre des groupements caractere sectaire." (Mai 30); Downloaded from: on September 30,2000; 8pp.

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafu .,nallrnjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 MarburgJournal ofReligion (January 2001)Kent, A. • - --

Associated Press. 1999. "Religion Briefs." (September 9); Downloaded from: 10741&id= 1999090912029458> on September 14, 1999: 4pp.

Asser, Seth M., and Rita Swan. 1998. "Child Fatalities From Religion-motivated Medical Neglect." 101 No. 4 (April): 635-629.

Barker, Eileen . 1984. The Making ofa Moonie: Brainwashing or Choice? Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Barnet, Richard J.; and John Cavanagh. 1994. Global Dreams: Comorations and the New World Order. Toronto: Simon and Schuster/Touchstone.

Barthelemy, Denis. 1999. "Intervention Francaise lors de la conference sur les droitsde 'Ihomme, mars 1999, Vienne, par le Sccretaire de la Mission interministerielle de lutte contra les sectes (Service du Premier ministre). (March): 8pp. (French, English, and Commentary); Downloaded from: on September 24: 2000.

Bell, Catherine. 2000: "The Treatment ofReligious Minorities in Western Europe." Testimony Before the House Committee on International Relations (June 14): 7pp.

Beneas, Mary. 1995. "Press Reports." Ethnos (October 18-20); Downloaded from: < http://aurora.eexi.gr/-antbosIRAIDED.HTM > on November 13,2000: 5pp.

Betsworth, Roger G. 1980. The Radical Movement ofthe 1960's. ATLA Monograph Series, No. 14. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, Inc., and The American Theological Library Association.

Billerbeck, Jens. 2000. "The Sworn Affirmation." Unofficial Translation by Joe Cisar. (June 22); Downloaded from: on July 13,2000: 2pp.

Blum, Andrew. 1993. "Church's Litany ofLawsuits." National Law Journal 15 No. 41 (June 14): 1,36-38.

Boucher, Norman. 1987. "Millions for God." Boston Globe Magazine 26): 13ff.

Bouilhet, Alexendrina; and Christophe Dore. 1999. "La France Brimes les Sectes." Le Figaro (June 11).

lllttp://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Steohen A. - , ..

Boyle, Kevin; and Juliet Sheen (Editors). 1997. Freedom ofReligion and Belief: A World Report. London: Routledge.

Breckenridge, Paul G. 1984a. "Memorandum ofIntended Decision." Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County ofLos Angeles. "Church ofScientology ofCalifornia vs. Gerald Armstrong, Mary Sue Hubbard, Intervenor." No. c 420153. 22); Filed in The Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia,Marin, County Courts, "Church ofScientology, International vs. Gerald Armstrong." No. 157680. Filed November 16, 1994; Bates Numbers 2350-2361.

1984b. "Appendix to Memorandum.ofIntended Decision." Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County of Los Angeles. "Church ofScientology ofCalifornia vs. Gerald Armstrong, Mary Sue Hubbard, Intervenor." No. c 420153. (June 22); Filed in The Superior

Court ofthe State ofCalifornia, Marin, County Courts, "ChurchofScientology, International vs. Gerald Annstrong." No. 157680. Filed November 16, 1994; Bates Numbers 2362-2376.

Bromley, David G,; and Anson D. Shupe, Jr. 1979. 'Moonies' in America: Cult, Church, and Crusade. London: Sage.

Brown, Tim and David Millward. 1998. "Children Saved From Cult's Mass Suicide." The Daily Telegraph [London] (January 9): 3.'

Brownstein, Ronald. 1990. The Power and the Glitter: The Hollywood-Washington Connection. New York: Pantheon Books.

Buchele, Klaus. 1994. "Call-To-Arms Germany." Issued by the German Task Force I/C [In Charge], Office of Special Affairs International. (May 4): 3pp.

Burgess, John. 2000 "U.S. Challenges Germany on Scientology." Washington Post (May 4): A19; Downloaded from: < http://www.washingtonpost.comlwp-dynlartic1es/Al045-2000May3.html> on September 18,2000: 3pp.

Business Review Commission ofthe National Assembly, 1999. '''Sects' or AssimilativeMovements in Switzerland." Report (July 1); Downloaded UnofficialTranslation by Joe Cisar on the World Wide Web < http://www.cisar.org! > then "News," then "Sorted byDate" to < http://cisar.org/990702a.htm >, (with links to the original governmental version in Germanand an unofficial webbed version in French).

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft .irnal/mjr/kentz.html 18/08/2003 Marburg·Joumal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent.Sr-r-hen A. • ...

Canterathe, Kevin. 2000. "Hatch Calls for Renewed Protection ofReligious Freedom Worldwide." Salt Lake Tribune (October 9); Downloaded from: < alt.religion.scientology > on October 9, 2000: 2pp.

Carnes, Tony. 2000. "Ambassador Seiple to Resign His Post." Christianity Today 44 No. 9 (August 7):20; Downloaded from: < http://www.christianityonline.com/ct/2000/009/9.20.html> on September 25,2000.

Center for Responsive Politics. 1998. "Lobbyist Spending: Clergy & Religious Organizations." Downloaded from: < http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/98catorders/W05.htm > on September 18,2000: lp,

------. 1999. "Representative Benjamin A. Gilman." (April 1); Downloaded from: , then search in "Find a Politician" for "Oilman, Benjamin A." on April 19,2000: 28pp.

CESNUR. 1999. "The Italian Supreme Court Decision on Scientology (October 8, 1997) [Plus Links]." (December 14): 3pp.; Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.org/testi/SCIE.HTM> on September 30, 2000.

------. 1999? "France Severely Criticized at Vienna OSCE Meeting[.] Hysterical Reaction by the Secretary of the French Anti-Cult Mission." Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.org/testi/Vienna2.htm >.

------. 2000a. "European Parliament Draft Resolution on Cults." Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.org/testi/Europe.htm > on September 17,2000.

------. 2000b. "France, Belgium Severely Criticized Again at V.S. Congressional Hearing." (January 20); Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.orgltesti/CSCE.htm > on September 23, 2000: 3pp.

----. 2000c . "New Religiosity in the 21 Century: CESNUR's 14th International Conference, Riga, Latvia, August 29-31, 2000." Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.orglconferenceslRigayrg.htm > on September 26,2000.

------. 2000d . "The 2001 International Conference-The Spiritual Supermarket: Religious Pluralism in the 21st Century." Dowriloaded from:

Chrobog, Jilrgen. 1997. "Letter to The Honourable BenjaminGilman, Chairman, Committee on International Relations, House ofRepresentatives, Washington, DC." (October 29): 2pp. httn:/lwww.uni-marburg.de/re1igionswissenschaftljournallmjrlkent2.htrot 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) KentSteohen A. _

------.2000. " Written Statement ofthe Ambassador ofGermany, .Jurgen Chrobog, forInclusion in the Official Record ofthe Hearing ofthe House ofRepresentatives International Relations Committee on Treatment of Religious Minorities in Western Europe,' June 14,2000." (June 14): 2pp.

Chronicle ofPhilanthropy. 1993. "IRS Ruling on ScientologyChurch May show Willingness to Cooperate." (November 2).

Church ofScientology. 1985. "Videotapes ofFederal Informant Reveal Bizarre Government Plot to Destroy Church. April/May): 12pp.

Church ofScientology International. 1993. "The War Is Over!" International Scientology News Issue 32.

------. 1994. "Honorary PROs in Action." Hotline [The Newsletter ofL. Ron Hubbard's Personal Public Relations Office International] 6 Issue 3: 6.

Cienski, Jan. 1999. "U.S. Bill Would Chide Germany for Refusal to Recognize Scientology." National Post [Canada]. (October 22):AI5.

Cimino, Richard P. 1990a. "New Issues Ahead for Religion in Eastern Europe." Religion Watch (March): 1-2.

------. "Catholic-Protestant Tensions Emerging Eastern Europe."Religion Watch (May): 6-7.

------.1991. "Update on Religious Movements."Religion Watch (September): 6-7.

Claridge, Thomas. 1992a. "Church Guilty in Spy Case." Globe and Mail [Canada]. (June 27).

------. 1992b. "Church ofScientology $250,000 for Breach ofTrust." Globe and Mail [Canada]. (September 12): A7B.

Clarkson, Frederick. 1997. Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press.

Clinton, Bill. 1996. "Ce que nous pouvons faire au sject des drougues." Ethique & Liberte No. 8 (Decembre): 17.

18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January Kent, A.

Cloud, John. 1999. "Law on Bended Knee.t'Time (September 13): 32-33.

Colomer, Josep M. (Editor). 1996. Political Institutions in Europe. London: RoutIedge.

La Commission d'Enquete. 1995. Les Sectes en France. Paris: Assernblee Nationale.

------. 1999. Les Sectes et L'Argent. Paris: Assemblee Nationale.

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. 1993. "Human Rights and Democratization in Unified Germany." Washington. D.C.: Staffofthe Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (September). 28pp.

1999. "Religious Freedom in Western Europe: Religious Minorities and Growing Government Intolerance." Hearing. (June 8): 129pp.

Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs. 1997. "Report on Cults in the European Union." Mrs. Maria Berger, Rapporteur. PE223.630/* A4-0408/97 (December 11); Downloaded through: . Search "REPORTS by PE-...number" on November 13, 2000: 15pp.

Cossu.Mathieu, 1998. "Proces e la Scientologie Lyon." Downloaded from: on March 4. 1998: 14pp.

Council of Europe. 1999. "Recommendation Activities ofSects." Legal Affairs and Human Rights Committee. 3pp; Downloaded from: < http://stars.coe.fr/doc/doc/edoc8383.htm > on September 3. 1999.

Court ofAppeal for Ontario. 1997. "HerMajesty the Queen (Respondent) and Church ofScientology of Toronto and Jacqueline Matz (Appellants)." C13047. C13207. (April 18): 143pp.

Cowell, Alan. 1997. "Germany Will Place Scientology Under Nationwide Surveillance." New York Times (June 7): 1, 6.

Crockett, Sandra. 1987. "Controversial Ministry Picks Baltimore as New Home Base." The Sun [Baltimore. Maryland]. (August 10).

lhttp://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent. Stenhen A.

Dahl, 1998. "Scientology's Influence Grows in Washington." S1. Petersburg Times (March 29): 1A, 14A.

Department oftheTreasury-Internal Revenue Service. 1993. "Closing Agreement on Final Determination Covering Specific Matters." (October 1); Downloaded from: on January 6, 1998: 59pp.

Deutscher Bundestag, 1998. Final Report ofthe Enquete Commission on 'So-called Sects and Psychogroups.' Translated by Wolfgang Fehlberg and Monica Ulloa-Fehlberg. Bonn: Deutscher Bundestag.

Diamond, Sara. 1995. Roads to Dominion. New York: Guilford Press.

Dumay, Jean-Michel. 2000. "Jacques Guyard Condamne Pour Avoir Qualifie le Mouvement Anthroposophe de Secte." Le Monde (March 23): 12.

Elving, Ronald D. 2000. "Starstruck: Celebrity, Politics, and the News Media." Media Studies Journal (Winter): 10-15.

European Court ofJustice. 2000. "Judgement ofthe Court" Case c-54/99 (March 14): 7pp.

Fautre, Willy. 1999. "Belgium's Anti-Sect War." Social Justice Research 12 No. 4: 377-392.

European Federation ofCenters for Research and Information on Sectarianism. 1999. "Common Declaration of the European Conference." (April 23-24); Downloaded from: onJanuary 11,2001: 2pp.

Fisher, Marc. 1992. "Evangelists Seek Souls In Once Atheistic Land."Washington Post (August 6): A33, A36.

- Foundation for Religious Tolerance. "2000 European Marathon for Religious Freedom is Offand Running." Downloaded from: < http://www.religioustolerance.netlhome.html > on September 29,2000: 3pp.

Frantz, Douglas. 1997. "Scientology's Puzzling Journey FromTax Rebel to Tax Exempt." New York Times (March 9):1, 30-31. -

Gilman, Benjamin A. 1999. "Gilman Cosponsors Resolution on Religious Discrimination in Germany[:] 'Germany is a Country That Should To [sic] Be a Leader in Tolerance,' Says Gilman." Press Release. (October http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafL.i .nal/mjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, St-nhen A.

21):2pp.

Gottleib, Robert; and PeterWiley. 1-984. America's Saints: The Rise ofMormon Power. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.

Government ofthe State ofBavaria. 2000. "MeasuresUndertaken by the Government ofthe State ofBavaria Against Scientology. 7. Use ofSo-Called affidavits ofProtection by Official Agencies When Granting Public Contracts." Downloaded from: on June 8, 2000: 1p.

Grove, Lloyd. 2000. "Ringing Scientology's Bell." The Washington Post (June 14): C3.

Goldberg, Jeffrey. 1997. "Washington Discovers Christian Persecution." New York TimesMagazine (December 21): 46f£.

Greater Grace Ministries. 2000. "France." (May 13); Downloaded from: on September 10,2000: 4pp.

Gunn, T. Jeremy. 1996. "Adjudicating Rights ofConscience Under the European Convention on Human Rights." In Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective. Edited by Johan D. Van der Vyver and John Witte, Jr. The Hague: Martinus NijhoffPublishers: 305-330.

------. 2000a. "The Two Faces ofFrance." Testimony ofDr. T. Jeremy Gunn before the House International Relations Committee, House ofRepresentatives. (June 14): 15pp.

-----,.. 2000b. [Curriculum Vitae]. 3pp.

Haag, Gerhard. 1992. "Project A." [Letter and Attachments]. (December 4): lOpp.

Hamburger Morgenpost 2000. "Deluded Scientologists Mob Ursula Caberta in Florida." (August 23); Downloaded from: on August 23, 2000: 2pp.

Hansen, Susan. 1997. "Did Scientology Strike Back?" The American Lawyer (June):

Hausherr, Tilman. 1999. "The Cult Apologist FAQ: Exposing the Cult's Willing Defenders." (November 19);

httn://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaVrnjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A.

Downloaded from: < http://home.snafu.de/tilman/faq-you/cult.apologists.txt >on October 2,2000.

Heimgaertner, Sabine. 1999. "France Declares War on Scientology and Demonstrates Powerlessness." dpa (October 2); Dowload from the Unofficial Translation ofJoe Cisar at: < http://cisar;org/991002a.htm > on October 7, 1999: 2pp.

Helier, Lawrence E. 1989. "Declaration ofLawrence E. HelIer." [On or About November 1]: 2pp.; Filed in The Superior

Court of the State ofCalifornia, Marin, County Courts, "Church ofScientology, International vs. Gerald Armstrong." No. 157680. Filed November Bates Numbers 2471-2472.

Henley, Jon. 2000. "Church Attacks New French Anti-Cult Law." Guardian [UK] (June 23); Downloaded from: on June 22, 2000: 2pp; with link to: .

Higgins, Alexander G. 1998. "U.N. Investigator Rejects as 'Puerile' Scientology's Nazi Claim." AP Worldstream (March 3); Downloaded from: < alt.religion.scientology > On 4, 1998: 2pp. (Received via e-mail).

Home, WilIiam W. 1992. "The Two Faces ofScientology." American Lawyer (July/August): 74-82.

House ofRepresentatives. 1997. " Expressing the sense ofthe Congress with Respect to the discrimination by the German Government against members ofminority religious groups, particularly the continued and increasing discriminationby the German Government against performers, entertainers, and other artists from the United States associated with Scientology."H.CON RES.22. (February 13); Downloaded from: < http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?cl05:H.CON.RES.22: > on April 19, 2000: 4pp.

------.2000. "Expressing the sense ofthe House ofRepresentatives with respect to violations in Western Europe ofprovisions ofthe Helsinki Final Act and other international agreements relating to the freedom of individuals to profess and practice religion or belief." H. RES. 588. (September 21).

Hubbard, L. Ron. 1976. Modern Management Technology Defined. 1984 Reprint. Copenhagen: New Era Publications.

Human Rights Watch. 1999. "Human Rights Watch World Report 1999: United States: Human Rights

htto:llwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschafuJ naVmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stenhen A. ." u

Developments." Downloaded from: < http://www'.hrw.org/worldreport99/usalindex.html > on September 18, 2000: 14pp.

Interhemispheric ResourceCenter. 1991 "WorldVision." (December): 14pp.; Downloadedfrom: on September 25,2000.

International Association ofScientologists. 1990. "What To Do." [Oversized Pamphlet]: Ip.

1994? "International Association ofScientologists: Ensuring the Future ofScientology Throughout the World." Magazine. [No Place or Publisher].

International Coalition for Religious Freedom. 1998. "ICRF Conference-'Religious Freedom in Europe toward the New Millennium." Berlin, Germanym May 29-31, 1998; Downloaded from: on September 23, 1999.

1999. "ICRF Conference-'Religious Freedom and theNew Millennium." Tokyo, Japan, May 23-25, 1998; Downloaded from < http://www.religiousfreedom.com/> on Septerriber 23, 1999. .

International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights. 1999. "Religious Discrimination and Related Violations of Helsinki Commitments." Report to the OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting on Freedom of Religion, Vienna (March 22); Downloaded from: on September 6, 1999: 2pp.

Introvigne, Massimo.1998. "Religious Liberty in Western Europe." Briefing ofthe Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. (July 30): 26pp.

------. 1998? "Dr. Lenz Does It Again! "; Downloaded from: on August 7, 1998.

------. 1999a. "Holy Mountains and Anti-Cult Ecology: the'Campaign Against the Aumist Religion in France." Social Justice Research 12 No. 4: 365-375.

----,--. 1999b. "Misinformation, Religious Minorities and Religious Pluralism." Statement to the Organization for the Security and Co-operation in Europe(OSCE)-Supplementary Meeting on Freedom ofReligion-Vienna. (March 22): 5pp.

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaUmjr/kent2.html> 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January Kent, Steohen A.

------.2000. "Dark Shadows: The Crisis ofthe Anticult Mission (MILS) and Its Report 2000." Downloaded from: < http://www.cesnur.org/testi/fr2K_dic1.htm >on January 6, 2001: 2pp.,

Jacoby, Mary. 1998. "High Profile Couple Never pairs Church and State." St. Petersberg Times (December 13); Downloaded from: < http://www.sptimes.com/Floridian/121398/Highyrofile_couple_n.html > on October 4, 1999: 7pp.

Jensen, Craig. 2000. "Written Testimony ofCraig Jensen." House Committee on International Relations on The Treatment ofReligious Minorities in Western Europe." (June 14): 8pp.

Jentzsch, Heber. [2000]. "A Call to Arms! European Religious Freedom Events 2000." Introduction-by Joava M. Good, Executive Director, Foundation for Religious Tolerance (August 13,2000). Posted by Alfred E. Noumenon in on August 27, 2000.

JournalOfficiel. 1905. "Loi du 9 decembre 1905 concernant la separation des Eglises et de l'Etat." (decembre 11); Downloaded from: < http://www.legitfrance.gouv.frlhtml/framejo.html> on October 8,2000: 19pp.

Keck, Margaret E.; and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, New York: Comell University Press.

Kennedy, J. Michael. 2000. "Raising Funds to House Memories ofWay They Were." Los Angeles Times (August 14); Downloaded from: < http://www.latimes.com/news/20000814/t000076320.html > on August IS, 2000: 3pp.

Kent, Stephen A. 1990. "Deviance Labelling and Normative Strategies in the Canadian 'New .Religions/Countercult' Debate." Canadian Journal ofSociology 15 No.4: 393-416.

1994. "Lustful Prophet: A Psychosexual Historical Study ofthe Children ofGod's Leader, David Berg." Cuitic Studies Journal 1 No. 2 (1994): ·135-188.

------. 1997. "Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force." Revised Version ofa Presentation at the Society for the Scientific Study ofReligion, San Diego, California 7); Available on the World Wide Web at and ; Revised and Expanded German and English Versions Published by Hamburg: Behorde fur Inneres-Arbeitsgruppe Scientology (October, 2000).

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftl.j .nal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. .

------. 1998 '. "Crimes." The Encyclopedia ofReligion and Society. Edited by William H. Swatos. London: Alta Mira Press: 121-122.

------. 1999a. "The GlobalizationofScientology: Influence, Control and Opposition in Transnational Markets." Religion 29: 147-169.

------. I 999b. "Scientology-Is This a Religion?" Marburg Journal ofReligion 4No.l (July): l lpp.; Downloaded through: < http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/ > on July 8, 1999: 29pp.

Kent, Stephen A. and Theresa Krebs. 1998a. "Academic Compromise in the Social Scientific Study of Alternative Religions." Nova Religio 2 No. 1 (October): 44-54.

------. 1998b. "When Scholars Know Sin: Alternative Religions and Their Academic Supporters." Skeptic 6 No. 3: 36-44; Also Available at: < http://www.skeptictank.org/wsns.htm>.

------. 1999. "Clarifying Contentious Issues: A Rejoinder to Melton, Shupe, and Lewis." Skeptic 7 No. 1: 21-26.

Kent, Stephen A.; and JamesV, Spickard. 1994. "The'Other' Civil Religion and the Tradition ofRadical Quaker Politics." Journal ofChurch and State 36 (Spring): 373-387.

Klein, Gary. 2000. "Marin Judge Refuses to Muffle Scientology Critic." (December 21); Downloaded from: < http://marinij.com/news/stories/index2001596.html > on December 22,2000: 2pp. '

Komrners, Donald P 1997. The Constitutional Jurisprudence ofThe FederalRepublic ofGermany. Second Edition. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.

Konigsberg, Eric. 1998. "Dark Lenz." York (July 20): 20-28.

Kreisberg, Louis. 1997. " Social Movements and Global Transformation." In Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics. Edited byJackie Smith, Charles Chat field, and Ron Pagnucco. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press: 3-18. '

Kruttschnitt, Christine; Rainer Nuebel; and Jeannette Schweitzer. 2000. "The Big Bluff." Stem (June 29); Downloaded from: < http://www.lisatrust.orglStern.htm > on August 2000: 3pp.

lmi-marbure.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaUmjr/kent2.htrn1 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January KentSte.. A.

Lattin, Don. 1992. "Journey to the East." New Age Journal (November/December):

Lewis, James R. 1999. "Let the Schola Who Is Without Sin Cast the First Stone." Skeptic 7 No.l: 18-21.

Landos, Tom and Benjamin A. Gilman. 1999. "[Letter.to Lord Russell-Johnston, President, The Parliamentary Assembly ofthe Council ofEurope." (June 18): 2pp.; Downloaded from: on September 23,2000.

Loomis, Mike. 1999. "Marco Faithful Gather for Prayer Breakfast." Naples Daily News [Florida, USA]. (January 28): 3pp.; Downloaded through: < http://www.naplesnews.com/> on September 25, 2000.

Louter, Michiel. 1997. "Disreputable Forces at Work Among the Sect Researchers at CESNUR." De Groene Amsterdamer [Holland], English Translation by Herman de Tollenaere From a Previous German Version. (August 13): 6pp; Dowloaded from: on August 27, 1988.

Lubasch, 1982. "Rev. Moon Is Convicted ofIncome-Tax Fraud ."New York Times (May 19): AI, A4.

Luedenscheider Nachrichten, 1999. "Officials: Scientologists Have Infiltrated Elysee Palace-Organization in France Rejects Accusations." (September 15); Downloaded from: < http://cisar.org/990915h.htm >on September 19, 1999: Ip. ·

Luxmoore, Jonathan. 2000. "Poland Steps Up Measures Against New Religions." Keston News Service Issue 7, Article 3 (July 6); 4pp. (B-mail copy).

Martin, Fiona. 1992. "In Your Face." PDXS [Portland, Oregon] 2 No.6 : 3-4.

Martin, William. 1999. "The Christian Right and American Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy (Spring): 66-80).

Martinez, Miguel[Compiler]. 2000 . "CESNUR Publicly Supports Scientology Propaganda in Germany." Downloaded from: on October 14,2000: 11pp.

Maxwell, Joe, 1992. "New Kingdoms for the Cults." Christianity Today (January 13): 37-40.

Mayer, Jean-Francois. 1999. "Out Terrestrial Journey is Coming to and End': The Last Voyage ofthe Solar http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft. 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, l .. 1

Temple." Nova Religio 2, No.2 (April): 172-196.

McCarthy, John D. 1997. "The Globalization ofSocial MovementTheory." In Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics. Edited by Jackie Srnith.Charles.Chatfield, and RonPagnucco. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press: 243-259. . .

McCarthy, John D.; and Mayer N. Zald. 1973. The Trend ofSocial Movements in America: Professionalization and Resource Mobilization. Morristown, New 1ersey: General Learning Systems.

1977. "Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory." American Journal ofSociology 82 No. 6 (May): 1212-1241.

McNair, Lord. 1999. "Religious Discrimination in Europe." [Letter to The Lord Russell-Johnston]. (March 10): lp.

Melton, J. Gordon. 1999. "Mea Culpa! Mea Culpa!" Skeptic 7 No.I: 14-18.

Miller, Timothy. 1993. "New Religions Drawing Followers and Conflict in Europe, Eastern Europe." Religion Watch (April): 1-2.

Miscavige, David. 1993. "David Miscavige Speaks on the IRS;" Downloaded from: < alt.religion.scientology > on April 8, 1997: 36pp.

Mission Interministerielle de Lutte contra les Sectes. 1999. de Reponse et Documentation a l'Attention des Services du Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres." (Juin 11): 4pp.

------. "Rapport." (January).

2000b. "Rapport 2000." (December 21). 69pp.

Moore, Art. 1992. "Fertile Ground for False Teaching." Christianity (January 13): 40-41.

Morgan, Lucy.1998. "Scientology Got Blame for French Suicide." The Times [Tampa, Florida] (February 8): lA,8A.

Imi-rnarbure.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/rnjr/kent2.htrnl 18/0812003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, Stp"henA.

Morrison, David. 1997. "A Diminished Vision? Does a Major Christian Relief Agency Advocate Population Control?" PRI Review [a Publication ofthe Population Research Institute]. (July/August): 5; Downloaded from: < http://www.pop.orglreports/dimvis.html> on September 25, 2000.

Morvant, Penny. 1996. "Sects Prompt Protests in Eastern Europe," HAL [Hungarian American List], OMRI [Open Media Analytical Brief]," (July 2); Downloaded from: on October 21, 1998: 3pp.

Muir, Hugh. 1994. "Peer Urges Cult Speakers to Quit." Daily Telegraph [London]. (April 18).

Mutual Agreement. 1986. "Mutual Release ofAll Claims and Settlement Agreement." (December 6): 16pp.; Filed in Church ofScientology, International vs. Gerald Armstrong, In the Court ofAppeal ofthe State of California, First Appellate District, No. A075027, Bates Numbers 463-478; in Bound Volume 2.

News American [Baltimore, Maryland, US.A.]. 1984. "Church Leaders Decry Ruling on Moon Case. Court Won't Block Clergyman's Jail Term." (May 15).

New York Post 1997. "Travolta Brings Sect's Appeal." (September 19): 23.

New York Times. 1998. "U.N. Derides Scientologists' Charges About German 'Persecution."'(April 2); Downloaded on April 3, 998 from an e-rnail Posting; 1p.

Office ofSpecial Affairs. 1995. "Greece Raid Handling Pjt: 558 PGN." Executive Directive. (August 26, Revised September 2): 9pp; Downloaded from: on August 20, 1997 (Greek Court Stamp Numbers 000834-000843)..

OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting On Freedom ofReligion. 1999. "Religious Discrimination and Related Violations ofHelsinki Commitments." Vienna. (March 22): 2pp.

OTS [Vienna, Austria]. 2000. "President Clinton to Speak with Leading Government Representatives." (October 5); Downloaded from: on October 7, 2000: 2pp.

Peckham, Michael. 1998. "New Dimensions ofSocial Movement/Countermovement Interaction: The Case of Scientology its Internet Critics." Canadian Journal ofSociology 23 No. 4: 317-347.

. rnal/rnjr/kentz.html 18/08/2003 Marburg journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. 1. VL I

Public Law 105-292. 1998. "International Religious Freedom Act of 1998." 112 Stat. 2787-(Oct. 27, 1998). Senate and House ofRepresentatives ofthe United States ofAmerica (October 27).

Reader, Ian. 2000. "Scholarship, Aum.Shinrikyo, and Academic Integrity." Nova Religio 3: 368-382.

Religious Tolerance. 2000. "Religious Intolerance in Belgium." Downloaded from: < http://www.religioustolerance.orglrt_belgi.htm > on September 17,2000: 3pp.

Reuters, 2000. "France Fined Over Missing Scientology Files." (January 5); Downloaded from: on January 6,

Ribuffo, Leo. 1998. "Religion and American Foreign Policy: The Story ofa CornpIex Relationship." The National Interest 52 (Summer); Downloaded from EBSCOhost on September 3, 1999: 17pp.

Richardson, James T. 1995. "Minority Religions, Religious Freedom, and the New Pan-European Political and Judicial Institutions." Journal ofChurch and State 37: 39-59.

------. 1997. "New Religions and Religious Freedom in Eastern and Central Europe: A Sociological Analysis." In New Religious Phenomena in Central and Eastern Europe. Edited by Irena Borowikand GrzegorzBabiski. Krak6w: NOMOS: 257-282.

------. 1999. "Social Control ofNew Religions: From 'Brainwashing' Claims to Child Sex Abuse Accusations." In Susan J. Palmer and Charlotte E. Hardman, Editors. Children in New Religions. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press: 172-186.

Russell, Ron. 1999. "Scientology's Revenge." New Times Los Angeles Volume 4 No. 36 (September 9-15): 13ff.

St. Petersburg Times. 2000. "France Proposes Dissolution ofits Scientology 'Sect.'" (March 1): lA, 8A (Reprinted from the Los Angeles Times).

Sarper, Banu; and Miguel Martinez (Editors). 1999. "CESNUR Critical (November 29); Downloaded from: < http://www.urnmah.org.uklkelebeklcesnur/eng.htm > on September 24, 2000.

Scientology Kirche Deutschland eV. 1994. "To the Delegations ofthe CSCE Participating States" (Cover letter

18/0812003 MarburgJoumal ofReligion 2001) Kent, A.

from Nicola Cramer). (September 12): 5pp.

Seiwert, Hubert. 1999. "The German Enquete Commission on Sects: Political Conflicts and Compromises." Social Justice Research 12 No. 4: 323-340.

Shea, Nina. 1997. In the Lion's Den: A Shocking Account ofPersecution and Martyrdom of and Today and How We Should Respond. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Sherman,Len. 1990. The Good, the Bad and the Famous: Celebrities Playing Politics. New York: Lyle Stuart.

Shupe, Anson. 1999. "Kent and Krebs' Skepticism Crosses the Line." Skeptic 7 No.1: 18.

Sindelfinger Zeitung. [Basil, Switzerland]. 1999. "Freiburg Official Did Not Know Swiss Law." (December I); Dowloaded from the Unoffical Translation by Joe Cisar at: < http://cisar.org/99120Id.htm > on October 9, 2000: 2pp.

Smith, Jackie; Ron Pagnucco; and Charles Chatfield. 1997. "Social Movements and World Politics: A Theoretical Framework." In Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics. Edited by Jackie Smith, Charles Chatfield, and Ron Pagnucco. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press: 59-77.

Stamm, Hugo. 1999. "UFO Sect Call for Suicide." Tages-Anzeiger (UnofficialTranslation by Joe Cisar).(June 19): Downloaded from: < http://cisar.org/990619c.htm> on October 1,2000: 2pp.

Stark, Rodney. 1985. "Europe's Receptivity to Religious Movements." In Rodney Stark, (Editor). Religious Movements: Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers. New York: Paragon House: 301-343.

State ofFlorida vs. Church ofScientology Flag Service Organization, Inc..., 1998. "Summons to Appear." Circuit Court, Sixth Judicial Circuit ofFlorida, In and For Pinellas County. CRC98-20377 CFANO-K. (November 13): 18pp. .

Stem, Christopher. 2000. "Hollywood Backs Hilary for N.Y. Senate Seat." 25); Downloaded from: < alt.religion.scientology 25,2000: 1p.

Stewart, James R, Jr. 1980. "Scientology's War Against Judges." The American Lawyer (December): 30-32.

18/08/2003 Marburg Journal of Religion (January 2001) Kent, Stenhen A. ' -'

Sullivan, Winnifred Fallers.1999. "Exporting Religion." Commonweal (February 26); Downloaded from EBSCOhost on September 3, 1999: 3pp.

Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County ofLos Angeles. 1984."Testimony ofGerald Armstrong." Transcript In "Church ofScientology ofCalifornia vs. Gerald Armstrong, Mary Sue Hubbard; Intervenor." No. c 420153: (May 10): 1889-1563.

Superior Court ofthe State ofCalifornia for the County ofMarin. 1995a. "Order ofPermanent Injunction." In Church ofScientology International vs. Gerald Armstrong; DOEs 1 through 25, inclusive." Case No. BC 157680 (October 17): 9pp. Bound in: State ofCalifornia, Court ofAppeal, Scientology versus Armstrong. Introductory Volume.

1995b. "Church ofScientology International's Memorandum ofPoints and Authorities in Opposition to Armstrong's 'Amended' Motion for Reconsideration ofEntry ofPermanent Injunction; Request for Sanctions Against Armstrong and His Attorney, Ford Greene." Case No. BC 157680 (December 1; Filed November 22): 16pp.; Bates Numbers 9431 to 9449. Bound in: State ofCalifornia, Court ofAppeal, Scientology versus Armstrong. Volume 34.

Swan, Rita. 1998. "Letting Children Die for the Faith." Free Inquiry (Winter): 6-7.

Swedish Government Commission. 1998. "In GoodFaith: Society and the New Religious Movements, Summary Report." Cultic Studies Journal 16 No. 1 (1999): 52-63.

Tabayoyon, Andre. 1994. "Declaration ofAndre Tabayoyon." Filed in the United States District Court, Central District ofCalifornia. "Church ofScientology International, vs. Steven Fishmanand Uwe Geertz. Case No. CV 91 6426 HLH (Tx). (April 4): 64 pp. (Plus Attachments); Available on the World Wide Web at: < on January 6,2001: 23pp.

Tarrow, Sidney..l998. Power InMovement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .

Ternisienrn Xavier. 1999. "Washington au Secours des Sectes." Le Monde (June 28): 1, 14.

Thibodeau, David; and Leon Whiteson. 1999. A Place Called Waco: A Survivor's Story. New York: PublicAffairs [sic].

htttJ://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/mjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, A. .

United Nations Commissionon Human Rights. 1994. "Implementation ofthe Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms ofIntolerance and ofDiscrimination Based on Religion or Belief: Germany." Report Submitted b Mr. Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur. (January 20); Downloaded from: on February 22, 1998: l Opp.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 1989. "Convention on the Rights ofthe Child." Adopted and Open for Signature, Ratification, and Accession by the General Assembly Resolution 44/25 of20 November 1989. Entry into Force 2 September 1990, inAccordance with Article 49;Downloaded from: < http: www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm > on February 2000: 19pp.

United States Claims Court. 1992. "Church ofSpiritual Technology v. The United States. No. 581-88T. (June 29); Downloaded from: on January 7,2001: 24pp.

United States Code. Sec. 7311. Loyalty and Striking. Downloaded from: on September 16, 2000.

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. 1999. "Steve McFarland, Religious Scholar, Selected Executive Director of the United States Commission onInternational Religious Freedom." Downloaded from: < http://www.uscirf.gov/cgi-binlprReader.pl?pr=2 > on September 18,2000: 2 pp.

------.2000. "The Commissioners.t'{July 07); Downloaded from: onSeptember 18, 2000: lp. (and links).

United States Court ofAppeals, Second Circuit. 1983. "United States ofAmerican v. Sun Myung Moon and Takeru Karniyama.Defendants-Appellants.' Argued March 23, 1983; Decided September 13, 1983. Federal Reporter, Second Series. Volume 718 1210-1247. (Cited as "United States v. Moon 718 F. 2d 1210 [2d Cir. 1983]).

United States Department ofState. 1994. "Germany Human Rights Practices, 1993." (January 31): 3lpp; Downloaded from: < Maj ...:Gennan> on September 12, 1999: 31pp.

------. 1996. "Daily Press Briefing" (October 18); Downloaded from the WorldWide Web at on April 27, 1998.

.:..maVmjr/kent2.html 18/08/2003 MarburgJournal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, St-nhen.A. -:»

------. 1997a. "Daily Press Briefing" DPB #9 (January 16).

------. 1997b. "United States Policies in Support ofReligious Freedom: Focus on Christians." Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Affairs. (July 22); Downloaded from: on September 2000: 57pp.

----..-. 1998. "On-The-Record Briefing on the International Religious Freedom Released by the Office of the Spokesman, Washington, D.C. (October 9); Oownloaded from: on November13, 2000.

------. 1999a. "Annual Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999" Released by the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (September 9): 43pp; Downloaded from: on September 1999.

------. 1999b. "France Country Report [for 1998]." (February): 15pp.; Downloaded from: on September 1999.

------. 2000a. "2000 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom: Executive Summary." (September 5): 23pp.; Downloaded from: < http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irCrpt/irCexec.html > on January 2001.

------. 2000b. "2000 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom: France." (September 5): 7 pp.; Downloaded from: < http://www.state.gov/www/global/humanJights/irf/irCrpt/irCfrance.html > on January 2001.

United States District Court for the District ofColumbia. 1979. "United States ofAmerica vs. Mary Sue Hubbard et. al.Stipulation ofEvidence." Criminal No. 78-401 (October 25): 283pp.

------. 1980. "United States ofAmerica v. Jane Kernber, Morris Budlong a/k/a Mo Budlong. Sentencing Memorandum ofthe United States ofAmerica." Criminal No. 78-401(2)&(3). (December 16): 36pp. " Von Rimscha, Robert. 2000. "Scientology Debate: Does Hollywood Pay Critics ofGermany?" Oer Tagesspiegel (June 16); Unofficial Translation by Joe Cisar Downloaded from: on June 16, 2000: 2pp.

httn·llwww.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumaVrnjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent,

Wallerstein,Immanuel. 1974. The Modem World-System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins ofthe European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. London: Academic Press.

Walsroder Zeitung [Basel, Switzerland].J999. "Germany Constitutional Security in Court in Switzerland." (November 30); Downloaded from the Unofficial Translation ofJoe Cisar at: < http://www.cisar.org/991130b.htm > on October 9,2000: lp.

Ward, The Right Honourable Lord Justice Alan. 1995. "W 42 1992 in the High Court ofJustice. Family Division. Principal Registry in the MatterofST (A Minor) and in the Matter ofthe Supreme Court Act 1991." (October 19): 295pp.

Washington Post. 1983. "Court Upholds Rev. Moon's Tax Conviction." (September 14): A5.

------. 1997. "Scientologists Lose Court Case." (January 24): A26.

------. 1999. "Missing Scientology Papers Addressed."(September 15); Downloaded from: on September 17, 1999:2pp.

Wayne, Leslie. 2000. "Trial Lawyers Pour Money into Democrats' Chests." New York Times (March 23): AI, A24.

Whitney, Craig R. 1994. "Scientology and Its German Foes: A Bitter Conflict." New York Times (November 7): A12.

Whittell, Giles. 1997. "Coup for Church as Studios Fear Box-Office Boycott." The Times (London), (January 10): 13.

Wilson, Bryan R. 1990. The Social Dimensions ofSectarianism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Wilson, Andrew H. 1997. "Declaration ofAndrew H. Wilson in Support ofEx Parte Application for Order to show Cause Re Contempt." In Superior Court of'theStateof'California for County ofMarin. Church of Scientology International vs. GeraldArmstrong et. al." Case No . BC 157680 (December 1): 7pp .

WISE International. 1993. "Special Edition on Albania." WISE (The Membership Newsletter ofWISE

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft.... :.maVIl1jrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion (January 2001) Kent, St-v-benA.

International). No. 32.

Wright, Stuart A. (Editor). 1995. Armageddon in Waco: Critical Perspectives on the Branch Davidian Conflict. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press.

Wuthnow, Robert. 1980. "World Order and Religious Movements." In Albert Bergesen, Editor. Studies in the Modem World-System. New York: Academic Press; Reprinted in Eileen Barker, Editor. New Religious Movements: A Perspective for Understanding Society. Toronto: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1982: 47-65.

Young, Josh. 1998. "Bill Clinton's Grand Seduction." George (March): 106ff.

Zald, Mayer N.; and John D. McCarthy. 1987. "Religious Groups as Crucibles ofSocial Movements." In Mayer N. Zald and John D. McCarthy, Editors. Social Movements in an Organizational Society: Collected Essays. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books.

Homepage

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftfjoumaUmjrlkent2.html 18/08/2003 Marburg Journal ofReligion'

Volume 8, No. 1 (September 2003) (22190 words)

Scientology: Religion or racket?

Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi University ofHaifa Haifa 31905 ISRAEL 972-4-8249673 eMail:

The name Scientology (a copyrighted and registered trademark) brings to mind a wide array ofclaims, observations, impressions, fmdings, and documents, reflecting complex and controversial history. The religion/not religion debate over various groups and organizations, prominent in theWestern media over the past thirty years, has usually presented the public and politicians with a religion versus "sect" or "cult" dichotomy: The classification issue in this article is framed differently. Hopkins (1969) offered us the terms ofthe debate in the bluntest and most direct way when he askedin the title ofan article in Christianity more than thirty years ago "Scientology: Religion or racket?" Read today, the Hopkins article sounds naive andcharitable, but this question still stands before us, and yet deserves an answer.

The question ofwhether any particular organization matches our definition ofreligion is not raised very often, andthis is true for both old and new religions (cf. Beit-Hallahmi, 1989; Beit-Hallahmi, 1998; Beit-Hallahmi & Argyle, 1997). That is because there is no shortage ofreligious behaviors and groups whose authenticity is never in doubt, but in some rare cases, authenticity and sincerity are put into question.

Regarding Scientology, we have two competing claims before us. The first, espousedby most NRM scholars, as well as some legal and administrative decisions, asserts that Scientology is a religion, perhaps misunderstood and innovative, but a religion nevertheless, thus worthy ofour scholarly attention. The second, found in most media reports, some government documents in various countries, and many legal and administrative decisions, states that Scientology is a business, often given to criminal acts, and sometimes masquerading as a religion. Let us start our examination ofthe issue with a piece ofrecent history, reported in a newspaper article, which is reproduced here in its entirety.

'Mental health' hotline a blind lead: The televised blurb offered mental health assistance dealing with the attacks. Callers reached Scientologists.

By Deborah O'Neil (c) St. Petersburg Times, published September 15,2001

Television viewers who turned to Fox News on Friday for coverage ofthe terrorist attack also saw a message scrolling across the bottom oftheir screens -- National Mental Health Assistance: 800-FOR-TRUTH. Unknown to the cable news channel, phone number

·http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 Marburg Journal ot keugion s» •• •••

connects to a Church ofScientology center in Los Angeles, where Scientologists were manning the phones. Scientology officials said the number is a hotline offering referrals to other agencies, as well as emotional support. "It was entirely a good-faith attempt to help people," said Ben Shaw, a Clearwater Scientology official. Church spokesman Kurt Weiland in Los Angeles said the phrase "National Mental Health Assistance" must have come from Fox. "I can assure you it didn't come from us," he said. church practices in Fox News spokesman Robert Zimmerman said the station received an e- ,'mail the hotline and airedthe number without checking it. The e-mail, which Zimmerman faxed to the Times, reads, "National Mental Health Assistance crisis hot line now open. Call1-800-FOR-TRUTH.'' It makes no reference to Scientology.

"The bottom line is we (messed) up," Zimmerman said. "Unfortunately, it didn't get vetted. We apologize." The hotline information ran for several hours once appearing below the image ofPresident Bush and his wife, Laura, at the National Day ofPrayer.and Remembrance in Washington. The news channel yanked the information Friday after learning ofthe Scientology connection, Zimmerman said. Michael Faenza, president and chiefexecutive ofthe National Mental Health Association, called the hotline number outrageous" and said Scientolo.gy "is the last organization" emotionally vulnerable should call. just leave a destruction in the realm ofmental 'The mental health asSOCIation, based in Virginia, is the country's oldest and largest nonprofit organization addressing all aspects ofmental health and mental illness.

"This is a very important and sensitive time," Faenza said. "I'd urge the Church of ' Scientology to stay out ofthe mental health side ofwhat happens in the country now."

Church officials said no was being recruited on the hotline and it did not attempt to disguise Scientology's involvement. "There's no attempt to hide anything," Weiland said. "Given the circumstances, it's more or less irrelevant because no one even talks about Scientology when they call." In some cases, callers were referred by the four Scientologists answering the phones to agencies compiling information about missing people. In other cases, callers were directed to agencies collections, Weiland said. Ifpeople called crying andupset, he said, they were told they could visit a Scientology center. "These people are grief-stricken," Weiland said. "Our people are working with c them to provide help through assistance methods we have in the church to relieve spiritual suffering." When a reporter called, a volunteer said free copiesofa- booklet, Solutions for a Dangerous Enviromnent, were available to callers: The booklet is a Scientology publication based on the works ofL. Ron Hubbard, although that was not mentioned in the phone call. The Church ofScientology has 450 volunteers assisting cleanup and rescue efforts in New York, Weiland said.

This text can serve as ajournalism textbook example ofasking all sides tell their versions, and then letting the readers reach their own conclusions. What shall we make of this recent event?

THE ISSUE IN SCHOLARLYWRITINGS

Bryan Wilson (1970, p. 143) stated that ...in Scientology, though perhaps only for reasons ofexpedience, the style of'church' and the simulation ofreligious forms has [sic] been adopted". Wilson later stated that in some religious movements ...activity that can be called worship or devotions is often very limited in time and scope (as in the cases of Christian Science, Scientology, and the Jehovah's Witnesses)" (1982, p. 110). Such an assertion reflects apparent lack offamiliarity with the actual practices ofthese groups.

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 There is simply no comparison between the absence ofworship or devotions in the lives ofmost Scientology operatives and clients and the significant presence ofsuch acts among followers ofChristian Science or Jehovah's Witnesses.

Eight years later Wilson calls Scientology "A secularized religion" (1990, p. 267) and starts his discussion oforganization with a reference to the financial value ofthe religion label. We must note that Wilson has never mentioned fmances when discussing Christian Science, the Disciples ofChrist, the Salvation Army, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, the Unification Church, or the Christadelphians (Wilson 1970, 1990). Moreover, the term "secularized religion" must strike most ofus as an oxymoron, no more meaningful than "religious secularity"

Subsequently, Wilson (1990) compares Scientologists to Quakers, and also makes the quite startling claim that "early Christianity began with therapeutic practice and acquired its doctrinal rationale only subsequently" (1990, p. 283). Wilson (1990, p. 282-283) meets the question ofclassification and motivation head on and states that"even ifit could be conclusively shown that Scientology took the title of'church' specifically to secure protection at law as a religion, that would say nothing about the status ofthe belief system". He then proceeds to test this particular belief-system by introducing a "probabilistic inventory" items -against which he checks Scientology beliefs. conclusion(p. 288) is that Scientology is a "congruous religious orientation for society", which sounds less like a definition and more like a promotional statement.

That Scientology should perhaps be put togetherwith other secular self-improvement schemes was suggested by Richardson (1983): "Apparently because ofconsiderable ' interest in techniques for self-improvement there isa very large market for groups like Scientology, est, TM, Silva Mind Control, and other such groups that offercourses for a fee" (Richardson, 1983, p. 73). Here Scientology is listed with est and Silva Mind Control, two groups that have never sought the religion label, as well as TM, which has actively resisted this label. Similarly,Passas (1994) classifies Scientology as offering self-improvement and self-enhancement, grouping it together with est.

Bainbrid & Stark 1981 called Scientolo "vast s c other ult" (p. 128) and ndicu ed its claims aboutthe "Clear" process and its outcome. They state that the "role demands ofClear" consist of"a confident acceptance ofimpossible ideas with a consequent willingness to make statements which outsiders would find incredible" (p. 131) While this assessment could easily be made about adherents to religions, old and new, itis unheard ofin the scholarly literature. One must wonder why the authors have used these mocking terms which they certainly would not use in discussing any recognized religious group, such as Jews, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses or Roman Catholics. Bainbridge & Stark also state that the "Clear" process "... is a therapy in which patients rapidly are taught to keep silent about their dissatisfactions, and to perceive satisfaction in the silence ofother members" (p. 133), which constitutes "pluralistic ignorance"(p. 132). Moreover, Bainbridge & Stark (1981, p. 132) use the occasion of their article about Scientology to remind their readers that "some quite successful contemporary cult leaders are conscious frauds".

Bednarowski (1995) cites the classification ofScientology as a racket by the media and legal scholars, and then (1995, p. 390) expresses her hope that "Scientology might choose to solicit the kindofoutside critique that is essential for any religious movement to curb its own excessive traits". One must wonder whether such hopes have been expressed in any scholarly writings about any old or new religion. Can you imagine a scholar hoping that Christian Science, the Branch Davidians, or Jews for Jesus would "curb their excessive traits"?

http://www.uni-ma:burg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/rnjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 _ .. --

Robbins (1988) quite clearly described the profit-oriented nature ofScientology activities, while Bromley & Bracey (1998), following Greil & Rudy (1990), called it a quasi-religion. "Quasi religions may be defined as collectives in which organizational and ideological tension and ambiguity regarding the group's worldview, perspective, and regimen are profitably used to facilitate affiliation as well as commitment" (Bromley & Bracey, p. 141; Greil & Rudy, 1990, p. 221). The use ofthe term 'quasi' in this context does not sound like a compliment, especially with the use of"profitably" in the same sentence. After all, Scientology demands and expects full recognition as the real .thing; authentic and genuine, and notjust "quasi". Bromley & Bracey (1998) also state that "ethics violations" in Scientology are actions which reduce profitability and productivity; but despite their use of'quasi', Bromley & Bracey not only give the organization their seal ofapproval, but wax positively hagiographic about its "prophetic founder". Later on they refer to "prophetic revelations", "spiritual discoveries", and "theology", terms never used by Scientology itself.

Wallis (1977), in the best-known academic study ofthe organization, describes a long history offraudulent activities and deceptive fronts, but still believes it is a religion. Thus, in writing the history ofthe organization in the early 1950s, Wallis (1979, p. 29) claims that"...there were certainly strong arguments for declaring Scientology a religion broadly conceived"

The terms ofthe religion racket debate are framed indirectly by Ei1een Barker when she states: "Unlike the Unification Church or the Hare Krishna, the Church of Scientology is not unambiguously a religion. There are, however, considerable economic advantages to be gained from being defined as a religion. Scientology has fought and, indeed, won court cases ... to the effect that it is a religion and, therefore,eligib1e for tax concessions"(Barker, 1994,p. 105).

SCIENTOLOGY IN COURT

Looking at the legal literature, including published court decisions, we discover that while scholars have been uniquely sympathetic to Scientology, the organization received much sympathy from members ofthe legal profession. Ofcourse, some lawyers have been generous in their praise, especially ifthey were being paid by Scientology. But presidingjudges and jurists on commissions ofinquiry worldwide have been definitely harsh and suspicious. This is not reflected in the total litigation record, where Scientology has scored some victories, but in cases where the definition ofScientology as an organization was at stake. What is significant is that courts in the United States have in rejecting Scientology's claimto be a religion

Ifyou ask legal scholars to classify Scientology, the consensus-judgment is quite clear, and numerous legal scholars as well as judges clearly feel that there something illicit and sinister about it. They are not just skeptical about its claims, but make decisive judgment calls and remain decidedly unconvinced that it is entitled to the religion label. John 1. Foster, a British 'urist char ed with investigating it (1971), gave us thedefinitive .stu y 0 clentology, based solely on the organization's own writings, and nothing else. His conclusions, which seem to have been ignored by NRM scholars, were that Scientolo can on to offer a system of s chotherapy, and as such be regu ated. Its only aim, he found, was to produce profits. y ciarms 0 Scientology to be a religion were ridiculed, and many ofits fraudulent acts were exposed in this report.

1 In two well-known cases, judges who encountered Scientology through cases before them volunteered a decisive diagnosis. In a 1984 ruling in London, Justice Latey : "Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious...it is corrupt, sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt \ http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 because it is based on lies and deceit and has as its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard, his wife and those close to him at the top" (see http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/ ). And in the same year in Los Angeles, SuperiorCourt Judge Paul G. Breckenridge,Jr., called Scientology "a vast enterpriseto extract the maximum amount ofmoney from its adepts by pseudo-scientifictheories ... The organization clearly is schizophrenicand paranoid, and this bizarre combinationseems to be a reflection ofits founder, L. Ron Hubbard" (Superior Court, Los Angeles County, June 22, 1984, Church ofScientology ofCalifomia v. Gerald Armstrong, Case No. .·C420143). Such statementsare truly unique in litigation involving religious organizations.

Burkholder (1974, p. 44) concludedthat court decisions had only proven the "ambiguous religious status" ofScientology. Friedland (1985, p. 589) classified Scientologyamong the "numerous tax-motivated religions that are frequently before the courts" and suggested that the motivationofits founderwas to avoid legal and tax interference in his business (cf. Reins, Schwarz, 1976)). Passas & Castillo (1992, p. 115)stated that it was a "deviant business... its deviance is its life blood". Reviewing the legal literature in the United States, Senn (1990) presents Scientologyas a prime example ofreligious fraud. These scholarshave not foundScientology "controversial", or having any "excessivetraits". They havejust that it is a criminal fraud.

The treatment ofScientology in United States courts has been unique for an organization claiming the religion label. Ifwe compare the case ofScientologyto the case ofthe Universal Life Church,we discoverthat the latter (a mail-order ordination business treated by scholars as such, see Melton, 1999) easily won over the IRS and received a tax-exempt status,while Scientologylost every time it tried to gain this status, and received no sympathy from the courts (Friedland, 1985; Schwarz, 1976). Court decisions since the 1960shave held that Scientologypractices were secular and fraudulent (See United States v. Article or Device, Etc., 333 F. Supp. 357 (D.D.C. 1971)) and over the twenty-fiveyears between 1967 and 1993, courts in the United States supported all IRS rulings against the organization, denying it tax-exempt status. The Supreme Court ofthe United States ruled (Hemandez v. CommissionerofIntemal . Revenue, 1989)that payments for "auditing" ='were not tax-deductible. THEMEDIA ON SCIENTOLOGY

Not onlyjudges, but several investigativejournalists issuedjudgments which were diametricallyopposed to that ofNRM scholars.In 1991,Time magazine published a cover story on Scientology, authoredby RichardBehar, a reporter who has specializedin writing on business and organizedcrime and had investigated Scientologyin the 1980s (Behar, 1986).Time described the organizationas "a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidatingmembers and critics in a Mafia-like manner"(Behar, 1991,p. 52). The 1991 Time expose was preceded by a series ofarticles by Sappell & Welkos (1990), which drew attentionto some ofthe same matters. Behar's 1991 expose won several awards, includingthe Gerald Loeb Award Distinguished Business and Financial Journalism and a Conscience-in-Media Award from the Society ofJournalists and Authors.

The Behar article, as summarizedin one court decision, asserted "that Scientology, rather than being a bona fide religion, is in fact organized for the purposes ofmaking money by means legitimate and illegitimate. The Article details various alleged schemes that the church allegedly uses to increase its revenues, including charging ever increasing fees to members, deceivingnon-members through the use offront groups, manipulating .securities and currencymarkets through the use ofinside information, and evading

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 taxes... These statements were either challenged by plaintiff[the Scientology organization] or held to be non-actionable by the Court on the grounds that no reasonable jury could find that they were published with actual malice. The sole statement still at issue in the case ("one source offunds for the Los Angeles-based church is the notorious, self-regulated stock in Vancouver, British Columbia, often called the seam capital ofthe world") merely implies that the same view which this Court has held to be non-actionable as not made with actual malice: that Scientology's purpose is making money by means legitimate and illegitimate Accordingly, the claim based on this , statement must be dismissedas-subsidiary to a non-actionable view expressed in the article" (US District Court, Southern District ofNew York, 92 Civ. 3024 (PKL) see www.planetkc.com/sloth/scildecis.time.html ).

The treatment ofScientology in the media is highly unusual. Time magazine has been described as a true representation ofUS culture (cf. Fox, 1971). It has been formed in the image ofits founder Henry Luce, born to missionary parents in China who became a devout believer in conservative Republicanism, and has served as a gatekeeper to mainstream legitimacy. The magazine has never in its history denied the religion label to any other groups, however controversial. Time did not call Scientology 'controversial', it did not refer to it as 'unorthodox', as many NRMs have been described. Itcalledita racket and a seam.

The wayThe New York Times has treated Scientology is quite similar. Frantz (1997a, 1997b) exposed Scientology's secular and litigation tactics, while Rich (1997) ridiculed Scientology's claims about its by Nazi-like governments, and expressed serious suspicions about the way it won its tax-exempt status, in a surprising and total surrender by the IRS, under circumstances thatcould only be described as highly mysterious. IRS Commissioner Herb Goldberg, Jr. was suddenly converted by the organization never been fully investigated.

26 REASONS FOR RE-EXAMINING THE CONSENSUS

Ifwe want to produce not justheat, but also some light in this debate, a re-assessment of the consensus is called for, and for this re-assessment more observations are needed. We should not listen to jurists, legal scholars, law school professors, or accept the judgment ofsome journalists. We should not even accept the judgment ofour colleagues without looking at more evidence. The public record, available and easily accessible, provides us with some additional materials, which, though far from hidden, rather oddly. seem to have escaped proper and adequate notice. We find that some aspects ofScientology's operations have been overlooked, and their absence from the scholarly record is troubling.

In the process ofobserving the organization in action, we will examine both current practices and the organization's history. These observations, anchored in authentic documents, reflect significant, representative, and symptomatic behaviors, not marginal events. The documents cited are authentic, unassailable and unchallenged. Most ofthem are now accessible on the Internet. In every case, I am urging you to read the original documents in their entirety and reach your own understanding oftheir meaning.

SECULAR OPERATIONS AND SELF-PRESENTATION

1. Self-Presentation at Recruitment: The "Oxford Capacity Analysis".

Let me introduce the concept ofrecruitment discourse, which refers to written and oral presentations directed at members as ofrecruitment efforts. Groups and http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 l -- _ '--r--.------'- -

businesses, while attempting to recruit clients or members, use recruitment discourse or rhetoric, which defines what they claimto offer. One well-known component ofthe recruitment process inScientology is the so-called"Oxford Capacity Analysis" (OCA), which is presented to the public as a "free personalitytest". "Your.personality has everything to do with your income, your future, your personal relationships, and your life. A test ofthis kind would normally cost $500.00 and up. It is offered to you here free of charge as a public service" (see http://www.scientology.org/oca.html).

The Claim about cost or value ofthe test happens to be false, because the "test" is totally worthless. The "Oxford Capacity Analysis" has nothing to do with Oxford, capacity, or analysis. No matter how you respond to this "personalitytest", its interpretation will lead to only onerecommendation: an immediateregistration in one ofScientology's "communication courses"(Foster, 1971). What is clear from observing the OCA and the it has been used by Scientology, is that this fictitious "test" is a purely secular dissimulation, designed to attract the unsuspecting with promises ofsecular self improvement. In addition to the fraudulent nature ofthe presentation,what it significant is that the OCA and all claims about it are purely and totally secular (Foster, 1971).

2. Self-Presentation at Recruitment: Dlanetics.

Another concept used in recruitmentdiscoursehas been Dianetics, defined as "the science of thought" and as "The Modern ScienceofMental Health". "It can, in the realm ofthe individual, prevent or alleviateinsanity,neurosis, compulsions, and obsessionsand it can bring aboutphysical well-being, removingthe basic cause ofsome seventypercent of man's illnesses" (http://www.dianetics.org/what/index.htm).

Over the years, Dianetics has been claimed as a cure for cancer, polio, arthritis, migraines, "radiation sickness", bronchitis,myopia, and asthma. In addition,Hubbard claimedthat Dianetics was "the total antidotefor the eradication ofbrainwashing"[sic] (HCOB No. 19, December 1955).There is reportedly one case where a child was raised from the dead through "auditing". WhateverDianetics is and does, ifanything,it is always presented as a purely secular way to self-improvement,one ofcountless similar schemes on the market.

3. Self-Presentation Recruitment: Cyberspace Testimonials.

Cyberspace is being inundated by Scientology testimonials, all prepared bythe organization and designed to sound sincere,personal and genuine. These texts use an extremely limitedvocabulary and grosslydeficient syntax. They might have been producedby an intellectually-challenged computer that ate some Dale Carnegiebooks, and uses the words "amazed" and "wonderful" too often. Read for example http://www.our-home.org/davidtidmanlmyself.htm. where David Tidman, who has been an employee ofthe Scientologyorganizationfor 18 years, and now has a "field Auditing Practice", tells us about himself and his success in Scientology.

Often the testimonials are quite briefand can be reproduced in their entirety, preserving their originallevel of(il)literacy: "Hello,my name is Dr. George Springer, and here is a littlebit about myself. I am a physician for 15years turned inventor and entrepreneur.I have been in Scientology since 1986 and with this cleverness grew and my inventions is aroundthe world....With my successin Scientology being so large its hard to encapsulate it with just a few words. OverallI would say that much ofwhat I have gained is a vastly increased awareness about life and livingness and the ability to create and expandin life" (see http://www.our-home.org/drgeorgespringer). On furtherinspection, "Dr." Springer, the successful Scientologist, turns out to be an impostor,who has never http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournal/mjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 _ --

been a physician, and his inventions turn outto be typical rejuvenation seams (see http://www.sptirnes.comlNews/OS0600/newsyflNorthPinellasfFDA_Risks_may_lurk_bsh"

While testimonials by scholars (see http://WWW.religion2000.deIENG/index.html)

emphasize the religious nature ofScientology, cyberspace personal statements emphasize

c purely secular success,with no hint ofreligion. All testimonials are by Scientology employees and franchisees who certainly owe their material success to the organization (see http://www.myhomepage.org.Lrichardfisco/index.htm)

What we should be concerned about when reading the cyberspace testimonials is not literary quality orfrnancial interests, butreligious content. In these testimonials, Scientology's carefully selected representatives are supposedly proselytizing, i.e. teaching .he faith, and we can ask what that faith is. There is simply nothing remotely religious in any ofthe messages.

4. Secular products and activities.

When we examine whether an activity could be construed as religious, the question to ask is ifthere could be a religious context or logic toit. Does it relate to any specific Is it a ritual?

"The average man isupagainst problems. He's asking himself, howcan I make more money? How can I my wife faithful to me? ...in Scientology processing he resolves these questions"(Hubbard, 1970, cited in Passas & Castillo, 1992, p. 105). Are these humanity's two main religious concerns? I will remind you that Bromley and Bracey (1998) consider this "processing" a religious ritual, 'and seem to be ignorant ofthe fact that this religious ritual was designed by its creator to the faithful with making more money and with avoiding wifely infidelity.

The majority ofactivities conducted by Scientology and its many fronts and . subsidiaries ofsecular products such as the "Clear" program, Sterling Management executive training, and self-improvement in scholastics. The "Clear" sales pitch is totally secular: "on.the Clearin.g Co.urse you will smo.OthlY achieve the stable state ofClear with Good Memory, Raised I.Q., Strong Will Power, Magnetic Personality, Amazing Vitality, Creative Imagination" (Bainbridge &Stark, I 1981, p. 128). .. Another case in point is the Purification Rundown, marketed by Scientology all over the world. "The Purification Rundown is a detoxification program which enables an individual to rid himselfofdrugs, toxins and other chemicals...a major breakthrough by L. Ron Hubbard that has enabled hundreds ofthousands to be freed from the harmful effects ofdrugs and toxins" (see faq.scientology.org/puri.htm). We do know that the "Purification Rundown" includes sauna and vitamins, both offered exorbitant prices ($1200). Officially, the Purification Rundown is a "religious program" (Mallia, 1998c), which every scientologist is required to take as the first step on the "Bridge to Total Freedom". What could be its religious context? The purification seam is similar to many products being offered all over the world by various quacks and crooks, with no claims to religion. Heber C. Jentzsch claims that he was cured ofradiation sickness through the Purification Rundown, which means that it is indeed an amazing medical breakthrough, still purely secular (Mallia, 1998c).

In other cases, the same Scientology product is defined as "religious" in one setting and secular in another. Study Technology is claimed to be a religious practice, sold at a price http://www.uni-rnarburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/rnjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 of$600 as part ofthe "church" program. same Study Tech is taught in schools and there is claimed to be secular (Mallia, 1998b).

5. The Secular "Way To Happiness". '

Scientology has been offering the public a document titled The Way to Happiness, described as "a non-religious moral code, based entirely on common sense, which is ( having profound effects around the world". It was authored by L. Ron Hubbard and .distributed by Scientology front organizations, protected by copyrights and trademarks (see http://www.thewaytohappiness.org/index.htm). The Way to Happiness Foundation is a front organization, created to operate within United States public and government supported institutions, and so claims to be specifically nonreligious. In recent years, the Way to Happiness has been offered in other countries. In early 2003, hundreds of I thousands ofcopies ofits Hebrew version were distributed in Israel.

. 6. Self-Presentation as a Secular Movement.

Some Scientology representatives state thatthe so-called church is not a religion. When a Scientology branch opened inJapan in .1985, itwas careful to present itselfas a 'philosophy' and not a religion (Kent, 1999). In the United States, an article in a Maine. newspaper that solicited thoughts about the "new millennium" from local church leaders reports that "Barbara Fisco, mission holder ofthe Church ofScientology in Brunswick, said that Scientology is not a religion and therefore not subject to the religious implications ofthe Year 2000" (Smith, 1999\www.timesrecord.com/main/79c6.htmt).

The case ofScientology in Israel is quite instructive. In various organizational forms, Scientology has been active amongIsraelis for more than thirty years, but those in charge not only never claimed the religion label, but resisted any such suggestion or implication. It has always presented itselfas a secular, self-improvement, tax-paying business. Otherwise, they offered the familiar products and deceptions, from the Oxford Capacity Analysis to Dianetics and Purification. The current Israeli franchise-holder told me rather proudly that he pays all required taxes. In its history as a commercial venture, the organization still got into legal trouble, and was charged with tax evasion least once.

7. The Anti-Psychiatry Campaign.

Scientologyhas attracted much attention through its propaganda effort against what it calls psychiatry. This has involved great expense and organizational effort, carried out through a variety offronts. Ifthe book Psychiatrists: Men BehindHitler (Roder, Kubillus, & Burwell, 1995) is a representative example, and I believe it is, it proves decisively that the campaign is rooted in total paranoia and pathetic ignorance. Reading this book, and I will urge you not to waste too much time doing it, makes clear that the authors simply have no idea what psychiatry is. But that is the least oftheir problems.

What I would definitely urge you to read is a briefstatement by Hubbard, titled "Constitutional Destruction" (http://freedom.lronhubbard.org).

In it you will find the rationale (ifsuch a word can be used here) for the anti-psychiatry campaign. You will discover that the World Federation ofMental Health represents a conspiracy, directed by Communists, to destroy "the West". You will also discover that "Electric shock and brain operations to depersonalize dissident elements were developed by Hitler...The turmoil ofschools and universities [the statement is dated June 9, 1969, and reflects events in the I960s] trace back [sic] to the agents ofthese groups and their http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 advice to corrupt puppetpoliticians...But all ofthese groups, whose control is uniform over the world and whose lines go straight to Russia, may be in for a terrible surprise. Since Scientology became aware ofthem they have lost seven oftheir top dozen leaders". The last sentence is puzzling, and implies physical liquidation and physical threat. This 1969 document is still presented by Scientology on its Internet sites (an earlier version is Appendix III in Wallis, 1977). Foster (1971) quotes the "Address by Beria to American Students at Lenin University", which was obviously authored byHubbard and purports to demonstrates how "Mental Health campaigns" are run from the Kremlin. What ..been noticed by Scientology is that the Soviet Union has disappeared, while the worldwide "mental health" industry is still going strong.

Most ofHubbard's writings, still presented on Scientology's web sites, carry the flavor of 1950s, or earlier. His writings about psychiatry as the handmaiden of Communism show him to be a classical 1950s right-wing paranoid. We know that The John Birch Society held the same views, and attacked the "mentalhealth racket", run by Communists (Westin, 1963).

In 1956, in an obvious reference to the 1954 Supreme Courtdecision to outlaw school segregation, he attacked the "... Supreme Court Justice who does not recognize the rights ofthe majority, but who stresses the rights ofthe minority and who uses psychology textbook s written by Communists to enforce an unpopular opinion" (Wallis, 1977, p. 199). The Brown v. Board ofEducation Supreme Court decision, handed down on May 17, 1954 enraged white supremacists like Hubbard. The Court considered as evidence findings ofresearch done by Kenneth Clark (1955), an .African-American psychologist, which further enraged those supporting segregation. We know that later on, Hubbard supported the apartheid regime in South Africa.

1957 Hubbard started the National Academy ofAmerican Psychology, whichoffered its own 'loyalty oath' to "prevent the teaching ofonly foreign psychology in public schools and universities" (Wallis, 1977, p. 200). Hubbard obviously does not know what psychology is, and sounds like a classical nativist (Higham, 1970), seeking to drive out foreign influences. He refers to psychotherapy in the US as "Euro-Russian'tfwallis, 1977, p. 200), and plans to introduce red-blooded American psychotherapy toreplace it. Hubbard clearly did not know anything the historical origins oftwentieth-century psychotherapy, which had nothing to do with Russia, and much to do with German speaking Central Europe. What is interesting is that "psychiatry", in Scientology's world, is accused ofbeing connected to both Nazism and Communism .

At a conference organized byCESNUR and others in 1991 and held in California, Heber C. Jentzstch was invited to present ahistory lesson. Among his many original discoveries were the composition ofthe participants in the Wannsee Conference, where January 20, 1942 fifteen Nazi officials met to discuss the Final Solution were all psychiatrists, according to Jentzsch. For the record: no psychiatrists were present)

and the origin ofelectroconvulsive therapy (developed "Nazi death camps", according to Jenzstch). The assembled participants rewarded Jentzsch with a warm applause.

Ideas about the connections between psychiatrists and the Nazis can be heard day from hospitalized schizophrenics all over the world. Jentzsch's history lessons were not the rantings and ravings ofa paranoid schizophrenic. They were the crude lies ofa cynic using the memory ofthe Nazis and the Holocaust for profit. Here we are not dealing with psychotic delusions but with cold-blooded propaganda, seeking to take advantage ofour natural reaction ofhorror. In this case, as in others, Scientology will exploit any human sentiments to generate more profits

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 Two years later, in 1993, a gathering ofNRM scholars at the London School of Economics, organized by CESNUR and INFORM, was again treated to a history lesson by Jentzsch. This time the topic was the historical similarity between Germany in the . 1930s and Germany in the 1990s. The way the German government allegedly treating Scientology was said to be identical to the way Nazi Germany treated Jews. This time the audience reacted with thunderous applause.

Theanti-psychiatry campaign, as far as can be told, started with a bit ofreality, and then . delusional. When Hubbard first introduced his "Dianetics, The Modem Science ofMental Health", he was in apparent competition with psychotherapy, which, because ofignorance, Hubbard regarded as identical with psychiatry. The next step is the delusion that his "mental health" system would be superior to other ones, and would be perceived as a threat or competition by other "mental health" providers. That those providers were Communists and directed from "Russia" is a nice cold-war paranoid touch. The notion that Scientology has ever been a threat to psychotherapy or "psychiatry" is purely illusory. Most psychiatrists and psychotherapists in this world have never heard of Scientology, andits impact on the worldwide "mental health" or psychotherapy industry (Beit-Hallaluni, 1992) has been non-existent.

. What is significant for our discussion that this particular case of.paranoia (cf. Meissner, I978;Robins & Post, 1997), so central to Scientology's identity and public activities.js totally secular, It clearly overlaps with some ofthe claims made by Lyndon LaRouche, again in the framework ora totally secular paranoia (King, 1990). Despite his opposition to psychiatry, an autopsy reportedly showed that Hubbard a user ofpsychiatric prescription drugs, as well as a regular user ofthe popular CNS suppressor ethanol, available without prescription in liquid form. "

8. Challenges to the Religion Label.

Among allorganizations claiming to be new religions, only Scientology's claim has so often been into question. Most NRMs have never had to face such challenges anywhere. Since the 1960s, courts and governments have ruled that Scientologyis a secular, profit-making organization, and should be treated as such. Thus, the status ofthe organization in France was revoked in 1985, after it had been determined that its aim was profit-making. Later on, Spain, Greece, GermanY,and Denmark to treat it as a for-profit

9. Solicitation ofimprimatur.

Since the "1970s, in an obvious response to the challenges to its claim to be a religion, Scientology has solicited, and received, testimonials about its religious nature from recognized religion scholars. Scientology is unique in this respect.

Office ofSpecial Affairs (OSA, earlier known as Dept. 20 or Guardian's Office) is the division within Scientology which is "responsible for interfacing with the society at large, including legal affairs, public relations, and community" (see faq.scientology.org/osa.htm). Among other things, this division is charged with intelligence and with taking care ofScientology "enemies". Scientology at some point decided to cultivate contacts with NRM scholars, and this has taken place through the OSA.·Its members have registered as participants at meeting ofthe Society for the Scientific Study ofReligion. Most recently, scholars have been invited to visit the organization's headquarters in Los Angeles, with all their expenses paid. .

10. Self-presentation as a Research Enterprise. http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumallmjr/beit.htrnl 18/09/2003 Unlike all known religions, and very much some secular psychotherapy systems, Scientology's claims have been couched not only in the language ofself-improvement, but ofresearch and discovery, rather than the language ofrevelation, prophecy -or salvation (contra Bromley &Bracey, 1998). This is the not only in its recruitment texts, but in all publications. Hubbard first attracted public attention with Dianetics, which he himselfdubbed a "Modem Science ofMental Health". In 1956, Hubbard claimed that Scientology "improves the health, intelligence, ability, behavior, skill and appearance ofpeople. It isa precise and exact science, designed for an age ofexact .:science" (Hubbard, 8).

Later, Hubbard claimed that Scientology "is today the only validated psychotherapy in the world... Scientology is a precision science...the first precision science in the field of the humanities... The first scienceto put the cost ofpsychotherapy within the range ofany person's pocketbook... The first science to contain the technology to routinely alleviate physical illness with predictable success" (The Hubbard Information Letter of April 14, 1962).

When J.L. Simmons,a well-known sociologist acting as the spokesman for the organization, gave the official Scientologyresponse to the Wallis (1977) study, he used terms such as "discoveries" (p. 266)and "scientifically objective" (p. 269). Nota word on revelation, divine inspiration, or theology.

COMMERCIAL NATURE OF OPERATIONS

11. RecruitmentStyle and

Throughout Scientology's history, recruitment has been known as "procurement actions", and handling potential clients has been driven by a sales orientation. Potential customers have always been known as "raw meat", and the goal is "to get the meat offthe street". "The operative terms here are 'effectiveness', 'getting thejob done'. There are no compunctions about hard-sell, no embarrassment about instrumental values or bureaucratic rationality" (Straus, 1986, 80). In the words ofthe founder, ...promote until the floors cave in because ofthe number ofpeople?and don't even take notice of that" (Hubbard, in Foster, 1971, p. 69).

12. Non-exclusive Membership.

Unique to the recruitment rhetoric is the official claim by Scientology that members of other religions can join its ranks, with no implications for either commitment. "It insists that membership Scientology is not incompatible with being a Catholic, Protestant, or Jew and goes so far as to encourage dual membership" (Bednarowski, 1995, p. 389).

13. SelfPresentation as a Business: Trademarks and Trade Secrets.

A trademark is legally defined as "any word, name, symbol, or device or combination thereof, adopted and used by a manufacturer or merchant to identify its goods and distinguish them from those manufactured or sold by others" (15 D.S.C. , article 1121). Examples oftrademark are Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, or Big Mac. The Scientology organization owns more trademarks than McDonald's, Disney, Microsoft, and probably the world's leading 100 corporations combined. Moreover, Scientology has claimed to own not only trademarks, but trade secrets as well (see http://www.theta.com/copyright/index.htm)

The Trade Secrets (1985) defined trade secrets as "information, including a http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 formula, pattern, compilation, program device, method, technique that derives economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use". Another definition states: "A trade secret is any information that can be used in the operation ofa business or other enterprise and is sufficiently valuable and secret afford an actual or potential economic advantage overothers" (Restatement, Unfair Competition, article 39). We realize that a business engages in trade, and relies on trade secrets. Why would a religion do that?

'1 4. Operation as a Business:

"A franchise is a business arrangement where the developer/owner (the franchisor) ofa business concept grantsothers (the franchisees) the licensed right to own and operate businesses based on the businessconcept, using the trademark associated with the business concept" (http://www.franchiseconnections.comldefl.html). The Arthur Murray Dance Studios, McDonald's, and Burger King are well-known global businesses that operate by franchising. Scientology branches (or sales outlets)are operated by franchise, just like McDonald's, with the organization receiving licensingfees, as well as a stipulated percentage ofearnings. In addition, recruiters, known as "body routers",are paid commissions of 10 to 35 percent for signing up new clients (Mallia, 1998a; Passas & Castillo, 1992).

15. Operation as a Business: Profit as the Goal:

Passas &Castillo (1992) state that Scientology is "an ordinary profit-making enterprise". Wallis (1977, p. 138)) reports that "Hubbard has 'sold his name' to the Church", which is a peculiar way ofdescribing the transmission ofreligious authority, but consistentwith the way a for-profit operation is run. Wallis (1979, p. 29) also asserts that the motives for major changes in Scientology's history were financial, The move to England in 1959 came about because "...the success ofthe Church ofScientology ofWashington came to the attention oftax authorities concerned about the three-quarters ofa million dollars earned during this period [1955-1959] by the tax-exempt Church". Findings in Church of Scientology ofCalifornia.v. Commissioner (1984) showed that the organization operated only for profit, siphoning offits earnings to Swiss bank accounts controlled by Hubbard and his.associates.

In the words ofits founder, Scientology's governing financial policy is

"A. MAKE MONEY...

J. MAKE MONEY

K. MAKE MORE MONEY

L. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MORE MONEY (Hubbard, 1972, cited in Senn, 1990, p. 345).

Hubbard's practical advice on tax matters

"Now as to TAX, why this is anybody's game ofwhat is PROFIT. The thing to do is to

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 assign a significance to the figures before the government can...So I normally thinkofa better significance than the government can. I always put enough errors on a return to satisfy their blood-sucking appetite and come out zero. The game ofaccounting is .

just a game ofassigning significance to figures. The man with the most imagination wins...Incomedoes notmean profit. One can and should make all the INCOME one possibly can. But when one makes INCOME be sure it is accounted for as to its source and that one covers it with expenses and debts. Handling taxation is as simple as that" (ChurchofScientology ofCalifornia V. Commissioner., 83 T.C., p. 430). These statements byHubbard, are according to Bromley & Bracey (1998), and to Hadden (http://cti.itc.virginia.eduljkh8:x/soc257/imns/scientology.html), part ofsacred scriptures.

Hubbard's financial ideals may have something to do with his estate, reportedly worth $640 million (Mallia, 1998a). They also well reflected in the prices Scientology are charged, where $376,000 is the cost ofreaching made public over the years show staggenng profits from the operation (Behar, 1991; Passas & Castillo, 1992). Richardson (1983) reported that the estimated annual income ofthe Scientology organization in the US alone was $100 million. In 1993, the last time Scientology had to report, it had $398 million in assets and $300 million in annual income (Mallia, 1998a). Wecan safely assume that ifthese are the reported figures, the real figures were even higher, as taxpayers are given to underreporting (see Hubbard's adviceabove). According to David Miscavige, Scientology's CEG, winning a US tax-exemption in 1993 saved Scientology from a tax bill that could have reached $ 1 billion (Frantz, 1997b).

16. Operation as a Business: Membership and Economic Interests.

The record shows that most ofthe loyal members ofthe organization, those who are willing to identify themselves in public as "Scientologists", are actually employees or entrepreneurs working with and for the organization, and whose livelihood depends on the survival ofScientology. As Wilson (1970, p. 165) put it"... the esoteric doctrines become not so much an aid to leadinga normallife as a means ofmaking a new livelihood". There may be a small minority ofheavily invested clients who also identify strongly with the organization. This lopsided division oflabor is very much in evidence in the well-publicized oflitigation involving "ex-Scientologists", In the vast majority ofcases, the individuals involved have been employees ofthe.organization.

loyalty to the is connected to economic ties. is created by either a heavy investment through fees paid (a minority ofcases) or by substantial earnings (a majority). This membership pattern seems unique and unusual.

17. Operation as a Business: The 1982 Mission Holders Conference.

This document, consisting ofthe official minutes ofa meeting between Scientology's top management and its franchise holders, is consistent with other documents and observations (see http://www.freezone.de/english/reports/e_mhcsf.htm). The occasion can be compared to a meeting between McDonald's managers and its franchisees or a gathering ofBuick dealers, an annual event where the retailers get a picture ofcompany strategy and a pep talk It could be a meeting ofCoca Cola bottlers, except that I imagine the atmosphere there to be much nicer.

(Steve Marlowe:"On this team you're playing with the winning team...It's tough, it's ruthless"). We can see here some (and just some) ofthe internal workings ofpost Hubbard Scientology (Hubbard was then alive, in hiding from law enforcement

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 agencies).

The internal world ofScientology as revealed here shows us an unattractive corporate culture, with management displaying no trust, and using threats and intimidation to keep ' the money coming in. Wendell Reynolds is introduced as "International Finance Dictator". He introduces the "International Finance Police" and warns "So if! hear one person in this room who is not coughing up 5% as a minimum you've got an investigation coming your way because you got other crimes in your mission. Questions on that?". This is a world ofquotas and "stats", by which activities are measured. Guillaume Leserve: .:"Now you've got to double ..Just take those quotas, double them for this David Miscavige: are winning legally. We are winning statistically. And Scientology is going . Statistically here means financially.

is clear is that there is money to be made in Scientology, and lots ofit. The atmosphere ofthreats, fear, and intimidation focuses on MAKE MORE MONEY, as cited above, and not on transgressions ofany religious or moral codes. But there is something else in the something which could only be described ascriminality. When describing the misdeeds ofthose breaking Scientology discipline and their fate, Ray Mithoffstates, when he wants to express extreme disdain: "I think the only thing lower would probably be an FBI agent". This reference to the FBI and another oneto the IRS express open hostility to the law. We cannot imagine such references at the Buick or · Coca Cola events. These frank expressions are most damning, and could only reflect criminal intent.

The meeting deals with trademarks and their legal meaning (with a warning by an attorney!), organizational charts, and licensing. Lyman Spurlock says: new corporate paper are [sic] designed to make the whole structure impregnable, especially as regards the IRS. Have any ofyou read the religious language in these corporate . papers? Before we came along and did this overhaul you couldn't tell whether you were dealing with a 7 Eleven store or Church ofScientology from corporate papers...The scriptures being defined as the recorded and written words ofL. Ron Hubbard with regard to the technology ofDianetics and Scientology and the organizations". So we realize that in 1982 the Scientology Mission Holders, supposedly members ofa religious organization, had to be told for the first time that they are in the business of selling scriptures, something which they could never have guessed. Other than the reference to "scriptures'" there are no expressions ofanything remotely resembling religious sentiments or rituals and no references to faith.

Norman Starkey mentions "a judicial statement that Scientology is a bona fide religion entitled to the protection ofthe free enterprise clause". This is an interesting and revealing slip, which could serve as a perfect example for Sigmund Freud's theory ofparapraxes (Freud, 1915/1916). A "Freudian slip" reveals hidden intentions and thoughts, not necessarily unconscious. Whoever was taking down the minutes possibly did not know what the free exercise clause was, but clearly knew about free enterprise. That this error has not been noticed by anybody until today offers added proofofthe authenticity ofthe document. .

SCIENTOLOGY'S HISTORY AND CREDIBILITY

18. Early History: Two Stages and the Conversion to Religion.

Scientology's early history is quite well known (Foster, 1971; Malko, 1970; Miller, 1987; Passas & Castillo, 1992; Wallis, 1977; Wilson, 1970). There is universal agreement that the Church ofScientology was preceded by a "pre-religion" stage, during which first . http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 _ - ,- -r

Dianetics and then Scientology were presented to the world as secular self-improvement schemes, specifically and explicitly based on "science", not religion.

Scientology itselfappeared as an improvement over Dianetics, and only later did it adopt the "Church" identity. "Scientology emerged originally as a form oflay psychotherapy" (Wallis, 1979, p. 30). The year 1953 was, according to most accounts, the year ofidentity transformation, the transition from secular Scientology to areligion and a Church. What was the motivation for this sudden conversion? During the years . before the Great Conversion, Hubbard was experiencing ups and downs, mostly downs, and was desperately seeking to re-organize and relocate his operations.The years 1952-1953 are marked by extreme stress and despair. Then, in 1953, the decision to seek the religion label was made.

In a letter written from England to Helen O'Brien, who was managing his US business at the time, on April 10, 1953, Hubbard wrote: "We don't want a clinic. We want one in operation but not in name, Perhaps we could call it a Spiritual Guidance Center. Think up its name, will you...It is a problem ofpractical business. I await your reaction on the religion angle... A religion charter could be necessary in Pennsylvania on NJ to make it stick. But I sure could make it stick". This letter (see http://bible.calscientology-hubbard 1953-clinic-Ietter.htm; Miller, 1987) makes clear that Hubbard was only concerned with making "real money" through "practical business", and that the "religion angle" seemed useful for that. Choosing the religion cover was clearly a "practical business" consideration. It was more profitable to appear as a religion, thus avoiding taxes and other kinds ofinterference or

And so, on December 18, 1953, the Church ofScientology, the Church ofSpiritual Engineering, and the Church ofAmerican Science were all incorporated in Camden, New Jersey by L. Ron Hubbard, Sr., L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., Henrietta Hubbard, John Galusha, Barbara Bryan, and Verna Greenough. Appointed as administrators ofthe three churches were L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Sue Hubbard, and John Galusha, The official history ofthe organization states that the first "Scientology church" was founded on February 14, 1954 in Los Angeles. This California outfit ordained ministers, and offered doctoral degrees in Scientology and theology, as well as certification as "Freudian psychoanalyst". was also paying a 20% "tax" to the Church ofAmerican Science.

The 1953 conversion was apparently short-lived, because on June 12, 1954,we find the Hubbard AssociationofScientologists International.(HAS) writing to the Phoenix, Arizona Better Business Bureau, and presenting itselfas a business "ofgood repute" with a "gross ofabout S10,000 a month". John Galusha, an administrator for the three Hubbrd churches, gives a fictitious biography ofHubbard (trained in physics "psycho-analysis", served with distinction in the navy, etc.), goes on to tell a bizarre tale ofHubbard's misadventures since 1950, and then states: "Awakening recently to the fact that many ofits interested people were ministers, the HAS has assisted them to form churches such as the Church ofAmerican Science and the Church ofScientology. Also, ...Hubbard helped finance the organization ofthe Freudian Foundation ofAmerica...In the latter and in the churches, the HAS has no further control or interest" (see www.xenu.netlarchivesIFBI/fbi-124.html ).

Then, in the summer of 1954, Hubbard decided that he was after all in the religion business. Some ofhis associates were apparently quite upset over this zigzagging, and so in August 1954, in an article titled 'Why Doctor ofTheology', Hubbard wrote: "For a few this may seem like a [sic] sheer opportunism, for a few it may appear Scientology is only making itselfunassailable in the eyes ofthe law, and for still others it may appear any association with religion would be a reduction ofthe ethics and goals ofScientology

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 itself'. Around the same time, Hubbard claimed to have discovered an Asian religion known as Dharma. One follower ofthat religion was named by Hubbard as Gautama Skyamuni. Later, Hubbard discovered Scientology's ties to Veda, "Gnosis", Tao, Buddhism, and Christianity. As we can see, a frantic search for a flag ofconvenience' occupied Hubbard for most ofthe early 1950s. This search ended with the choice of religion as a the best cover.

In 1962 Hubbard made clear again his motivation for seeking the religion label: "Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organization basis throughout the 'world. This will not upset in any the usual activities ofany organization. It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors" (Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, HCOPL, 29 October 1962).

According to Bromley and Bracey (1998) Hubbard had a conversion after discovering the reality ofthe human spirit, and this led from "the religion angle" to a transformed "prophetic founder". Wilson (1970, p. 163) stated that the change occurred "when mystical and metaphysical legitimation could be provided for what had previously been a pseudo-scientific orientation". Wallis (1979, p. 33), speaking ofHubbard and Mary Baker Eddy, founder ofChristian Science, wrote: "Transcendentalization permitted the founders to claim the doctrine as a direct personal revelation". However, that's exactly what Hubbard did not do.

When dealing with what seems to Bromley and Bracey (1998) like a religious idea, Hubbard claimed that his was a discovery, not a revelation: "Probably the greatest

discovery ofScientology and its most forceful contribution to mankind has been the > isolation, description and handling ofthe human spirit, accomplished in July, 1951, in Phoenix Arizona. I established, along scientific rather than religious or humanitarian lines that the thing which is the person, the personality, is separate from the body and the mind at will and without causing bodily death or derangement" (Hubbard, 1956/1983, p. 55). Hubbard expresses himselfclearly and does not regard the religion label as a blessing or a great honor.Bromley and Bracey (1998) apparently are not aware ofthis document, and do not realize that their "quasi- religion't's own official scriptures deny the religion label and mock its defenders.

The scholarly literature contains specific discussions ofthe reasons for the conversion from secular psychotherapy to a religion (Bainbridge & Stark, Wallis, 1977). There seems to be a consensus on the secular reasons for this transformation: "The switch to a religion, however, can be regarded as a managerial decision, as it was better able to retain its "clientele" and compete" (passas & Castillo, 1992, p. 105). As Wallis (1977,1979) shows, Hubbard used only one way ofmeasuring his success: fmancialliquidity and solvency. This is the only motive and the only consideration mentioned by Wallis as Hubbard keeps changing organizations and moves across the USA from New Jersey to Arizona and back to New Jersey.

It took many years for the transformation into a "Church" to take hold, as we can see in the minutes ofthe 1982 Mission Holders Conference. Religious terms, such 'scripture', 'fixed donations' instead offees, and 'mission' instead offranchise first appeared in 1967. In 1969, Hubbard wrote: "Visual evidences [sic] that Scientology is a religion are mandatory ...Stationary is to reflect the fact that orgs are churches" (Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, HCOPL, 12, 1969).

19. Early History andMotivation: Hubbard's World'

Scientology is L. Ron Hubbard's personal enterprise and legacy and any explanations of http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 its nature and development must start with that fact.The key to understanding this organization is its biography, starting with the early years and the early developments, which defmed its style and operations. A group's history and the biography ofits founder seem to be a key or the key to its later development and Hubbard (1911-1986) indeed created Scientology in his own image and in the image ofhis own paranoia (cf. Wallis, 1984).

Hubbard consistently lied about every aspect ofhis life. He claimed to have had a distinguished military career and decorations, which he never had. He claimed an education in engineering and physics which he never had, and so on. His failures in higher education and the navy were turned into fantasied success stories. "The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism, greed, avarice, lust for power" (Judge Paul G. Breckenridge, Jr., Superior Court, Los Angeles County, June 22, 1984, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia v. Gerald Armstrong, Case No. C420143).

But beyond that, Hubbard's actions reflected a kind ofcriminal megalomania, a morality ofthose who see themselves as above conventional moral edicts. What he consistently displayed were the components ofwhat has been called psychopathy: selfishness, deceitfulness, and callousness. The psychopath may seem poised and articulate, but actually lies with ease to serve his own needs. Thanks to his well-developed social skills and undeveloped conscience, he can easily con others, and feels no guilt or remorse (Cleckley, 1976).

Hubbard's basic assumption was that humanity was divided into hustlers and suckers, he was going to be one ofthe former. Those gullible enough and stupid to believe his claims deserved to be exploited. Identifying potential customers meant looking for hardships and vulnerability inpeople and preying, in Hubbard's own words on "the bereaved or injured" (Wallis, 1977, p. 158). The predatory nature ofthe organization is revealed in this early stage, with Hubbard searching for weaknesses and suffering in others, and using them for profit. In the polio victims story what we see is a criminal mind and a sadistic imagination at work, showing the facility with which he makes up new ploys and con games. This is Hubbard's version ofBarnum's Law, which is also his Sermon on the Mount. Blessed are the polio victims, fortheirs is the right to build Hubbard's empire with their money. There are millions ofsuckers out there, the bereaved and injured, just waiting to be exploited. Only one motive can be in this story, and that is profit. The basic motive is not malevolence, but profit. The commercial exploitation ofsuffering and despair is the Bridge to Total Freedom. Hubbard wanted very much to live beyond the reach ofthe law or the tax collector. This may be a common fantasy, but only a few try to turn it intoreality. An illegal business wants and needs protection from any legal interference, but Hubbard wanted not justprotection, but real immunity, and the religion label could give you this kind ofimmunity.

Hubbard's motives are apparently revealed in his fiction as well. A film based on by Hubbard's novel Battlefield Earth was produced in the late 1990s. It has won in seven out ofnine categories ofthe Golden Rasberry Award for 2000, including the worst film category, and its lead actor, John Travolta, was nominated for the worst actor. (The film also won first place in a list ofthe 100 worst films in history). Bryant (2000) reports that in this film "TerI, played by John Travolta, is chiefofsecurity ofthe Psychlos?an alien species driven by greed" (p. 65) and that TerI "hails from a corporation whose moral compass is set only to profitability"(p. 64). Does life imitate art, or vice versa?

During the first stage in the organization's history, Hubbard decided that he was founding

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.htmI 18/0912003 a secular, "scientific", enterprise, and rejected any possibility ofidentification with or as a religion. Then, in a dramatic turnaround, he changed his mind and decided to found not one church, but three! In documents from the years 1950-1953 (Wallis, 1977), Hubbard emerges as a man in crisis, an ideal candidate for religious conversion (James, 1902; Beit Hallahmi, 1992; Beit-Hallahmi & Argyle, 1997) but his crisis is practical, not spiritual. He wants and needs money and power, in that order. In the early 1950s, the Dianetics organizations Hubbard set up twice collapsed in bankruptcy, and so he was a man in search ofsolvency, first and foremost. Some would have us believe that there occurred a -'greatand sudden illumination, agreat transformation, a resurrection and redemption, all in one day. Other evidence shows a con man groping for new gimmicks.

simplest explanation is the most plausible. Its early history does explain the nature of Scientology. Hubbard was a creative paranoid liar, like the founders ofmany groups, religious and secular, but his particular paranoia was essentially secular. Scientology started as a psychotherapy system, one among thousands. It might have been more bizarre simply because ofthe personality ofits creator, but his unique personality, leadership, creativity, and paranoia made it into a profitable global enterprise.

The religion label was sought as a cynical-ploy, like many others. Hubbard was an effective and diligent con man, possibly "the greatest con man ofthe century" (Gardner, 1957, p. 263) who left behind a highly successful super-seam, which still embodies his spirit.

20. Litigation, Harassment, andDeception

Scientology has become known for its aggressive way oftreating anyone perceived as a critic. The strategy has been called "an ultra-aggressive use ofinvestigators and the courts" (Frantz, 1997a). Scientology's annual legal bill amounts to $20 million or more (Behar, 1991) and it is constantly involved in aggressive litigation. This litigation strategy has been less than fully successful, and Scientology has paid out millions over the years to many plaintiffs (Home, 1992). While a few successful litigation cases are easily remembered, in others the outcome has been traumatic, far from an easy triumph. Actually, at any given moment, Scientology is involved in scores ofongoing legal battles in the United States and elsewhere. Court proceedings in many ofthese cases are quite revealing, and what reveal reminds us again that we may be dealing with a corporation characterized by both profit-making and criminality, rather than a religious movement. What has been revealed in the course oflitigation includeddocuments and acts which prove criminal intent and deception (cf. Wilson, 1990 on the unexpected costs oflitigation).

Litigation is one part the intimidation strategy, which includes harassment by various means. Most media reports on Scientology have led to harassment campaigns with journalists and jurists as targets. Richard Behar was harassed by a team of10 lawyers and 6 private investigators (Home, 1992; MacLaughlin & Gully, 1998). A Californiajudge was severely harassed (Home, 1992). Description ofScientology pressure tactics have appeared not just in the mass media, but have been noted in scholarly writings: "Scientology, for instance, employs techniques ofharassment against critics" (Cole, 1998, p. 234). That threats are being directed against researchers has also been noted (Ayella, 1990). Wallis (1979) gave a detailed accountofScientology pressures and dirty tricks directed at him. Scientology wants to instill fear, and it does, all over the world. Its operations turn truly malevolent only when threatened, i.e. when profits are in danger.

Scientology's aggressive litigation strategy, which is regularly applied together with the of pnvate investigators to uncover crimes, is also a projection ofHubbard's

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumaI/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 own objective situation ofinvented biography, constant lying, and many cover-ups. This objective situation has led to subjective fears and obsessions. We may call that the "skeletons in the closet" projection.

"And we have this technical fact?those who oppose us have crimes to hide...Try this on your next critic. Like everything else in Scientology, it works.

Sample dialogue:

George: Gwen, ifyou don't drop Scientology I'm going to leave you.

Gwen: (savagely) George! What have you been doing?

George: What do you mean?

Gwen: Out with it. Women? Theft? Murder? What crime have you committed?

George: (weakly) Oh, nothing like that.

Gwen: What then?

George: I've been holding back on my pay...

Never discuss Scientologywith the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist. Because they do" (Hubbard, in Foster, 1971, p. 147).

Hubbard assumed that we all lie about our past, present, and future. This may be true for the likes ofhim, but not for everybody. Most ofus clearly do not have as much to hide as Hubbard did when he was alive, and as his brainchild still has.

21. The Scientology Criminal Record.

Floyd Abrams, the well-known First Amendment lawyer, once said that Scientology is "libel proof' because it has been so often held to commit evil and despicable acts (Home, 1992). Any way you look at the record ofScientology involvements in what may euphemistically be called "legal difficulties" all over the world (i.e. wherever the corporation decides to open an outlet) is indeed extraordinary. It includes not just hundreds ofcases oflitigation and official inquiries, but scores ofconvictions for such crimes as burglary; forgery; obstruction ofjustice, and fraud (Friedland, 1985). Wilson (1970, p. 166) states that Hubbard's move to England in 1959 took place because the organization "risked prosecution in the United States in using the American mails for material and propaganda that might be deemed fraudulent".

Scientology's best known criminal case in the United States came to a legal conclusion in 1980, after 11 Scientology leaders, including Mary Sue Hubbard, were convicted of burglarizing the offices ofthe IRS and theJustice Department, among other targets, and went to prison. Later court decisions found that the organization burglarized IRS offices, stole government documents, and manufactured and falsified records be presented to the IRS (USA v. Mary Sue Hubbard, 1984). Contrary to what Passas and Castillo (1992) claim, these are not "white collar" crimes.

Criminal Intentions and Policies.

http://www.uni-marburg.delreligionswissenschaftljoumaVmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 A Scientology document dated March 25, 1977 (see http://www.holysmoke.orglcos/latey.htm) lists "Red Box Data", which should be kept in separate containers and be ready for removal. They include:

"a) Proofthat a Scientologist is involved in criminal activities.

b) Anything illegal that implicates MSH [Mary Sue Hubbard], LRH [L.Ron Hubbard].

c) Large amounts ofnon FOI-tFreedom ofInformation Act] does.

d) Operations against any government group or persons.

e) All operations that contain illegal activities.

Evidence ofincriminating activities

g) Names and details ofconfidential financial accounts."

This document gives us an idea about the origins ofthe Scientology criminal record. In legal language, it constitutes clear evidence ofan attempted obstruction ofjustice. Article c) above refers to large numbers ofgovernment documents, obtained illegally and not through the Freedom OfInformation Act.

As we know, a massive destruction ofdocuments (requiring the work of2oo individuals) did take place at least (Sappell & Welkos, 1990). "In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard's representatives ordered the shredding ofall documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations... In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded" (California Appellate Court, 2nd District, 3rd Division, July 29, 1991, B025920 & B038975, Super Ct. No. C 420153). We also know that Hubbard spent the last six years his life, 1980-1986, as a fugitive from justice, hiding in California under a false name, with the full knowledge and support of the organization (Sappell & WeIkos, 1990).

23. Criminal Strategies; Infiltration

Wallis (1977) described the use offronts and the infiltration oflegitimate organizations and groups as two major Scientology strategies, and compared them to Communist party operations. According to Wallis (1977), the infiltration ofboth civil society groups and government agencies was outlined by Hubbard in the 1960 document known as 'Special Zone Plan'. Legitimate organizations targeted for infiltration included the IRS and the FBI, as well as the news media. In the United States, Scientology successfully infiltrated the IRS in the 1970s (Friedland, 1985), as well as the Justice Department, and probably other government agencies and non-government organizations and corporations. We also know that Scientology had planned to plant its agents in the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the US Export-Import Bank (Behar, 1991). Media reports suggested that there has been successful infiltration oflaw-enforcement agencies in Canada.

24. Deception as Policy: Strategies ofMasquerading.

In US politics, the use offronts is common, but covers are easily blown. You may choose an attractive name, but you don't expect your financial backing to remain secret. We know that Citizens for Better Medicare is financed by drug companies, seeking to

http://www.uni-marburg.delreligionswissenschaftljournallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 - -- -

protect their profits, and that The Coalition to Protect Americans Now is financed by some big defense contractors, just as Americans for Job Security is a front for huge corporations acting to eliminate the rights ofworkers. In politics we take such actions in stride, but religions are not in the business ofsetting up fronts.

Scientology's use offronts is unique in both quantity and quality, and it has been a matter ofpolicy since its inception. This use offronts has been a major part ofthe organization's activities, and it indicates an acknowledgement ofhaving something (or more than just something). to hide. Have you ever heard ofthe Jewish Coalition for Religious Freedom? Will you be surprised to learn that it is a Scientology front? Scientology has operated the Alliance for the Preservation ofReligious Liberty, Narconon, Crimonon, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), the Committee on Public Health and Safety (COPHS), American Citizens for Honesty in Government, the Committee for a Safe Environment, the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Social Justice, Concerned Businessmen's Association ofAmerica (CBAA), the Association for Better Living and Education (ABLE), the Religious Research Foundation (RRF), Applied Scholastics International, The Way to Happiness Foundation (TWTH), Social Coordination International, and World Institute ofScientology Enterprises (WISE). In Britain, Scientology started the Citizens' Press Association and the Association for Health Development and Aid, among other fronts (Wallis, 1977).

A Scientology document dated 9 March 1970 presents some ideas about the uses of fake identity card policy: "Invent letterhead ofsome organization that is spurious, i.e. have it printed up and use it to make queries ... Examples "Ford Foto Features" or "Council for Human Relations in Industry". Ifyou have a letterhead ofany sort you will get answers to your questions most ofthe time .. Ofthese using a phoney News Agency is the mostsuccessful" (see http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/latey.htm)

This creation offronts started early. Reading the history ofearly Hubbard fronts, as described by Wallis (1977) one is impressed by both the creativity and the deceit involved in this huge effort. Before 1960, Hubbard had such fronts as the American Society for Disaster Relief, The Society ofConsulting Ministers, and the Constitutional Administration Party (Wallis, 1977). .

One ofthe first fronts was The Freudian Foundation ofAmerica, setup in early 1954. It offered certification as"psychoanalyst" or "Freudian analyst" (Wallis, The letter from the Hubbard Association ofScientologists to the Better Business Bureau of Phoenix, Arizona, dated June 12, 1954, and cited above, claimed an inspiration from the "Freudian Institute in Vienna". There has never been such an institute.

We must wonder why someone starting a religion would want to adopt the guise of anything "Freudian". Sigmund Freud, as we all know, was an atheist, and the psychoanalytic interpretation ofreligious beliefs has not made him popular among religionists (Beit-Hallahmi, 1996). Moreover, Freud was the icon and the embodiment of "Euro-Russian" psychotherapy and ofthe whole "mental health" establishment, which was a major target ofHubbard's hostility. This attempted "Freudian" connection reflected both real ignorance and a desparate search for marketable products. More recently, Scientology has changed its mind about Sigmund Freud, as can see http://www.nopsychs.orgIFRF.html where "Psycho-Analysis, the forerunner to psychiatry" is soundly denounced for its atheistic nature.

The Freudian Foundation story is pretty much the model for many Scientology operations since the early days. It is clear that for Hubbard inventing a new label, identity, guise, or disguise was a practical matter approached without any hesitation or doubt. The cynicism,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 speed and facility with which covers were adopted and then dropped reflect the true motivation behind them. Labels, identities, and guises were changed and adopted at will; they were all treated as gimmicks, useful at the moment andpossibly dropped by the wayside soon afterwards. Just like the nuclear physicist identity of"Dr. Hubbard". The frounder and his disciples would come up with any deceptions necessary to promote their business. '

This is the corporate survival strategy at work since the early 1950s. Over the past fifty .:years, hundreds front organizations were started and mostly dropped. Only a few have survived for long, and those have proven some usefulness. That is why the Freudian Foundation, started in 1954, and the National Academy ofAmerican Psychology, started in 1957, are no longer with us.

For Scientology, using fronts is one way ofobtaining funds from government and charity sources (Mallia, 1998c). The World Literacy Crusade is an extremely profitable front, gaining US governmerit grants, as well as grants from private donors and school systems. The so-called rehabilitation program known as Narconon has been anincredibly profitable front through federal grants and corporate donations (Mallia,1998c). Fronts may help one another look respectable and make more money. Thus, the Association for Better Living and Education (ABLE) may come out in support ofNarconon or the World Literacy Crusade (Behar, The Foundation for Advancement in Science and Education (FASE)is another example ofa profitable Scientology front, earning federal money as well as donations from large corporations such as IBM and McDonald's.

The extensive use offront organizations reflects the scope ofScientology's ambitions and its desire to hide those ambitions through the use offake calling cards. Some fronts reflect "a totalitarian ideology with world-dominating aspirations" (Kent, 1999, p. 158), but achievements in terms ofpolitical influence have been limited to United The world is not moving any closer to Hubbard's utopia. It should be pointed out again again that beyond their clearly deceptive and often sinister nature, Scientology fronts are totally secular in definition and'action.

Deception Strategies: Fake Calling Cards and Vulnerable Targets.

Since the 1950s, the calling card strategy has been used to identify and attract potential clients. Identifying sales potential meant looking for hardships and vulnerabilities in people and preying, in Hubbard's own words, on "thebereaved or (Wallis, 1977, p. 158). Specific groups ofvulnerable individuals have been identified and targeted. In the early days ofDianetics, Hubbard advertised in the ' following way: "Polio victims. A research foundation, investigating polio, desires volunteers suffering from the after effects ofthat illness" (Wallis, 1977, p. 158). We cannot imagine that too many polio victims actually came to the Dianetics outlets, but what is significant is the vision behind this particular sales gimmick.This took place in the early 1950s, but we have evidence showing that this strategy has remained a major part ofthe Scientology deception repertoire.

The New CAN affair in the late 1990s can serve as a definitive illustration. The old CAN (Cult Awareness Network) was a notorious "anti-cult" group. One ofthe few good things we can say about the old CAN was that it did not hide its true identity or aims, immediately revealed by the name Cult Awareness Network. Following a vicious litigation campaign by Scientology, the old CAN went bankrupt in 1996 (Hansen, 1997). But this was not the end ofits history. It did almost immediately come back to life as a Scientology front, under the name ofthe New Cult Awareness Network (New CAN) . The New CAN "provides factual information on the dangers ofcults". It uses the same logo,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 letterhead, and phone number as the old CAN. (see Russell, 1999, or www.newtimesla.com/issues/1999-0909/feature-.p.html). The New CAN even advertises itselfas having a phone number and address in Illinois, just like the old CAN, but even that is not true. Ifyou dial (773)267-7777, someone in California will answer.

The New CAN represents what is known in intelligence parlance as a "false flag" operation, one ofthe more sophisticated things any intelligence service can be proud of. In this kind ofapproach to a potential agent, an intelligence officer presents himselfas belonging to an ally rather tharra-hostile power (Polmar & AlIen, 1996). Here we are not dealing with intelligence services, so what is the goal ofthe operation?

One must wonder why this particular act ofmasquerading has been designed in this way. the old CAN was so disreputable, why use its name, logo, and phone number? Ifthe old CAN was so notorious, and had such a bad reputation, why keep its hateful old name? The logic ofthis particular seam is that there are people out there looking for information on "cults", and this is a population Scientology would like to know about and penetrate. Individuals looking for information on "dangerous cults" may be among those described by Hubbard as the "bereaved and injured". To reach them, the whole facade ofthe "anti cult" group is kept, and the mere use ofthe term 'cult' would betray immediately a deceptive intent. Why would an organization accused ofbeing a "cult" keep alive that pejorative term? Targeting individuals who are attracted by the idea of"dangerous cults" is done by keeping all the old CAN trappings. Otherwise these trappings would have been dropped. We have no way ofknowing how successful this particular deception scheme has been, and how many callers have approachedthe New CAN. Scientologyoperatives have claimed it as a great success (see www.newtimeslacomlissuesI1999 We cannot imagine that New CAN has been deluged with calls, but what counts is the thought, and what is important is the idea, the fantasy, the design, behind New CAN. The design, reminiscent ofthe "polio research" idea, is one oftargeting vulnerable individuals.

The Training Routinefor Lying.

Scientology has its own Training Routine for Lying (TR-L), used in the preparation ofits staff

"Intelligence Specialist Training Routine-TR-L

Purpose: To train the student to give a false statement...To train the 'student to outflow false data effectively....

Commands:.. "Tell me a lie"...

Training Stress: In Part 1 coach gives command, student originates a falsehood... In Part 2 coach asks questions ofthe student on his background or a subject. Student gives untrue data ofa plausible sort that the student backs up with further explanatory upon the coach further questions...The coach flunks... for student fumbling on question answers..." (see http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/latey.htm)

WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE

The first finding to emerge from our observations is the remarkable degree ofcontinuity over the past fifty years. As Wallis (1977, 1979) has pointed out, the development of bureaucratic structures has created an organization that not only survived, but has been marked relative stability in strategies policies. It seems that pick up http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournaVmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 segment ofthe organization's behavior, or any document, at any pointin time over fifty years, and immediately tap the essential spirit ofScientology.

Our documentary base ofevidence is especially solid and thorough. Relying on Scientology's own documents seems both fair and reliable (er. Foster, 1971). My goals in reading them has been to determine motivations and look for religious content. Most of these documents are, according to NRM scholars, genuine parts ofthe sacred scriptures, coming from the "prophetic founder" (Bromley & Bracey, 1998). Hubbard, and some of his followers, our very cooperative informants.

TAKING THE RELIGION LABEL SERIOUSLY

Bryan Wilson, arguablyone ofthe most brilliant minds in the study ofnew religious movements, establishes the notion ofa minimal definition ofreligion, which will justify according the religion label to Scientology (Wilson, 1990). What he clearly argues is that in decidingon the correct classification for Scientology we need to look at its beliefsand nothing else. The motivation for the creation ofthis beliefsystem, or any other context, are irrelevant. Let me repeat what Wilson (1990, p. 282-283) states: "even ifit could be conclusively shown that Scientology took the title of'church' specifically to secure protection at lawas a religion, that would say nothing about the status ofthe beliefsystem". '

Wilson's (1990) position on the centrality ofbeliefis something I wholeheartedly share (seeBeit-Hallahrni, 1989; Beit-Hallahmi& Argyle, 1997), but his examination of Scientology beliefs chooses to ignore the history and context ofthose beliefs, and there can be no real interpretation without establishing a context. Some have argued that it is the attitude ofcurrentfollowers, rather than the original intentions ofthe founder, . that determine the status ofa group as a religion. This is what Wilson has argued, but it can be easily countered with the following example:

Let's assume that somebody managed to copy the genuine minting technology so effectively that he printed a $100 bill that looks like the one produced by the United States Engraving Office. Our social constructionist colleagues would then say that a $100 bill is genuine ifits users believe it to be. Its history and the motivations ofits makers would lead us to call what looks like an authentic bill a successful counterfeit. The issue beforeus is indeed the issue ofintent and motivation. The motivation ofthe United States Engraving Office is not identical, or in any way similar, to that ofthe counterfeiter, even though the respective products may look the same to us. Our social constructionist colleagues would rightly remind us that the United States Engraving Office represents orthodoxy, monopoly, and hegemony, and is extremely sensitive to threats by competitors. The motivations which created the two products in question are distinct, and they start with an idea. Religions, course, are not issued by the mint. A religious movement starts with an idea, taking the form ofvarious claims on our trust and credence. How can religious motives be assessed?

CONTEXTUALIZING BELIEFS: THE ACTION CONTEXT

The beliefsystem argument used by Wilson (1990), should be tested. Beliefmust be . embedded and situated in an actual context. It is quite clear that traditional notions ofthe sacred (Otto, 1923/1950; Eliade, 1959), so central to the study ofreligion, are totally irrelevant to our discussion. The beliefs examined by Wilson (1990) may be "religious", but their role in the life ofthe organization remains unclear. Are they truly defining feature ofScientology? We could find out who actually follows this belief system. Why would anybody express disembodied beliefs, without any corresponding

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 - --

behavior? We need to fmd actual believers who proclaim these beliefs and live them out in religious activities. Beyond the texts that propound the beliefs, do we have any other indications that anybody actually follows them? Beliefs and ideas have behavioral consequences only when they are embodied and acted upon. Has anybody ever had a conversion to Scientology? As I have noted earlier, even Scientology delusions (about "psychiatry") are secular.

What is needed for a real beliefsystem to operate is not just the existence ofa text ' presenting some beliefs, but a social and behavioral action context. In a genuine religion, we find beliefs in the context ofritual and the creation ofa community of'believers'(Beit Hallahmi, 1989). Wallace (1966) listed what he called "the minimal categories of religious behavior", which included prayer, music, physiological exercises, exhortation, reciting the code, simulation, mana, taboo, feasts, sacrifice, congregation, inspiration, and symbolism. This list is obviously irrelevantto any analysis ofScientology, because none ofthe behaviors covered in these categorieshas ever been observed within the organization. What we clearly don't have in Scientology is the religious activity context, which would include rituals, worship, and believers expressing theirfaith in many ways, such as individual artistic creations.

What percentage ofthe organization's activities reflect, specifically address, or express, its "religious" beliefs in any way? This should be compared to the percentage ofactivities relevant religious beliefs are reflected, specifically addressed, or expressed in the case ofMethodists, Mormons, Roman Catholics or Christian Scientists. Is there a hard core ofbelievers in the Scientology leadership? The 1982 Mission Holders Conference minutes, reported above, show that the upper echelon ofthe organizartion is completely cynical about its operations. What about the clients?As Wilson himselfpointed out (1970), what potential clients are interested in is self-iIIlprovement, and not and later (Wilson, 1990, p. 273) stated that "the appeal is rather the promise ofpersonal therapy", and so Scientology operates by promising self-iIIlprovement. That is Why the first encounter with the organization is through the "Oxford Capacity Analysis", through Dianetics, "The Modem Science ofMental Health". Do any ofthe clients hold and express religious beliefs? We have seen no evidence ofthat.

CONTEXTUALIZING BELIEFS: THE DECEPTION CONTEXT

While we find it hard to discover the religious activity context ofScientology's stated beliefs, what we do discover rather easily is the deception context, which must have a bearing on the issue ofmotivation. The use offake calling cards not just in the operation offronts, but in the core ofthe organization itself, as it approaches the public, is significant The way a person or an organizationintroduces itselfis always telling. What does a totally deceptive introduction mean?

That act by itselftells us something important. Anybody using a fake calling card has something to hide. Why should recruitment rhetoric be based on fraud? And why should it be based on a secular fraud ifthe organization offering it is supposed to be a religion? The obvious goal ofrecruitment rhetoric is to get the customersinto the store. Another important aim ofScientology recruitment rhetoric is screening for vulnerability and gullibility. Those taking seriously the claims about the "Oxford Capacity Analysis" or the "Purification Rundown" are obvious candidates for purchasing other (fake) products.

Is the criminal record ofScientology relevant to its classification? In defining religion, the moral dimension is often ignored, and rightly so (Wilson, 1990), because the main criterion (Beit-Hallahmi & Argyle, 1997) is beliefin the context ofaction, but criminality have on judgments ofbeliefs. Evidence ofa consistent pattern offraud is

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumallmjrlbeithtml 18/09/2003 relevant to judgment. A criminal record by itselfshould have no bearing on judging a beliefsystem to be religious or secular, but it does have a bearing when self-serving claims create the context ofsuch a system.

In addition to the findings around the actual motivation for seeking the religion label and re-organizing Scientology as a church in 1953-1954, the record contains much evidence regarding a consistent pattern ofdeception in the form ofofficial lying, the use offronts and fake calling cards, and various illegal acts. Hubbard's compulsive documentation, . which was part ofhis bureaucracy-building effort (Wallis, 1977, 1979), necessitated issuing written directives. What we are facing is a modus operandi, an operational-style encountered repeatedly. As we have observed above, almost every single activity and every single Scientology operation involves a deliberate fraud. We find a consistent pattern ofdeception, so that it's hard to find any assertion, claim or document presented by Scientology which is not a false claim. Other groups may be just as deceptive, but we do not have the same documentation for them. It is this body ofevidence that is largely ignored by Bromley & Bracey (1998) and by Wilson ( 1990).

A genuine religion may be involved in serious crimes, as the case ofAum Shinrikyo so well illustrates. Deception by itselfis notalways or illegal; it is always immoral. In the cases where deception is not strictly illegal, it still reflects a clear intent and a choice to cheat, hide, and misrepresent what the perpetrators themselves believe to be the truth. Its history ofcriminality and deception should affect ourjudgment ofScientology rhetoric. The context ofdeception is the most relevant to our discussion. Scientology has operated under a cloud ofsuspicion since its very beginnings, and this cloud ofsuspicion is likely to remain hanging over it because ofits use ofdeception in every aspect ofits activities.

CONTROL CASES AND THE ISSUE OF MOTIVATION

As we have seen, Scientology boasts a two-stage history, with a transition from secular psychotherapy to religion. We need a comparative framework, and the comparative method has been applied by Wallis(1977, 1979) and Wilson (1990) when they mentioned Christian Science as a similar case. Wallis (1979) and Wilson (1970) suggested a similarity between the ofScientology and the early history Christian Science. This comparison is interesting and intriguing, but ignores the historical context, the ofthe founders, the recruitment rhetoric, and the nature ofthe membership (England, 1954). Anybody taking this comparison seriously more than two minutes should visit the nearest Christian Science Reading Room.

What is needed are true groups, including more cases with differing outcomes. How can we find control cases in this ofstudy? What we can find are natural groups, developing under similar conditions, and reaching different outcomes. This is not a laboratory experimental study, but an experiment ofnature. What could we learn from control cases?

When does a psychotherapy movement become a religion? Has this ever happened before, or since? The first thing to realize is that every year, thousands individuals invent self-improvement schemes and make extravagant claims about them. In modern society one encounters a great variety ofprivate salvation and self improvement methods ranging from psychoanalytic institutes to "voice therapy", numerous "healing" methods, various meditation techniques, Tai Chi, "Color Therapy", etc. Most ofthe individuals who market these schemes, like the rest ofus, do not like either public scrutiny or taxation. But very few among the inventors ofpsychotherapy systems acted like Hubbard in his chameleon-like ability to change labels and disguises,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/beit.html 18/0912003 all designed to evade scrutiny and taxes. Most private salvation groups operate as businesses. They may try to avoid taxes in practice, but not as a matter ofstated principle. No psychotherapy movement that we know ofhas ever been transformed into an NRM.

Well, one could say, Scientology isn'tjust any psychotherapy system. At some point it became not any kind ofpsychotherapy, but a 'psychotherapy with a soul', and then it became a religion. Well, when and how often does a 'psychotherapy with a soul' become a religion? The best control case for Scientology would be a 'psychotherapy technique which'includes a component ofbeliefin an eternal soul which migrates from one body to another over time. Fortunately, we do have such a perfect control case.

Scientology's main "spiritual discovery", according to Bromley & Bracey (1998), is the existence of"immaterial, immortal, spiritual entities...called thetans" (p. 144). Because every human being is.also the incarnation ofa thetan, every human beingis a "being of infinite creative potential" (p. 144). We do know about hundreds ofpsychotherapy systems which assume the existence of"immaterial, immortal spiritual entities", just like Scientology. This is exactly what is being claimed by thousands ofpsychotherapists, except they all still pay their taxes (or at least don't claim an exemption).

In Scientology, the alleged discovery ofthe soul occurred only after the psychotherapy method had been in place for awhile. In the control cases we have before us now, the idea ofthe soul has either been part ofthe system since inception, or is a matter of some dramatic discovery (Weiss, 1988). There have been thousands ofindividuals the past fifty years (and before) offering the world psychotherapy systems based on the notion ofpast lives. Actually, these have become more visible and more popular over the past 30 years. But none ofthem ever claimed that he was starting a new religion (cf Wilson, 1990).

Wilson does not seem to know about the burgeoning industry, all over the First World, of individuals offering some variety ofpsychotherapy based on the notion that traumas accumulated in past lives are the cause ofpresent difficulties. This is known as past lives therapy, past life regression, regression therapy, soul memory retrieval, hypnotic regression, holotropic therapy, or reincarnation therapy (Weiss, 1988; Woolger, 1987). Quite logically, some practitioners now offer future life progressions, or progression therapy, for cases where problems are caused by traumas in future lives ..The claims made about the success ofthese methods are similar to those we hear about in connection with Scientology or with some other psychotherapy techniques. Success stories illustrate cures ofmany difficult and persistent complaints. Claims have been made about the cure of phobias, post-traumatic stress disorders, depression, eating disorders, multiple personality disorders(MPD), arthritis, diabetes, addictions, and cancer. One ofthe more obscene aspects ofthis industry is the use ofindividuals' fantasies about the Holocaust as an essential part of"past lives".

The practitioners claim various identities and labels, such as psychotherapist, hypnotherapist, "healer", "psychospiritual counselor", "teacher ofancient wisdom", "transpersonal counselor", "transpersonal clinical hypnotherapist", "transpersonal psychotherapist", or medium. All these labels, and some others, are being used, but no one claiming any ofthem has decided to become the founder ofa religion.

The connection to common religious ideas ofthe soul is quite obvious, and often troubling to followers ofmajor religions (see http://www.pcts.org/soulcomb.html). Weiss (1988) claims to have received, through his work on past lives, messages from "the Masters" entities told the nature "the universe and Woolger

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumal/mjr/beit.html 18/0912003 · .... _---

(1987, p. 253) speaks of"unfinished kannic business". Morris Netherton, a probation officer with Los Angeles County, is one ofthe global leaders therapy (Netherton, 1978), and runs The Association for the Alignment ofPast Life Experience (AAPLE). "The Association encourages the integration ofone's personal religious beliefs with [its] techniques and procedures ... It is the Association's beliefthat an expression ofthe religious selfis both a right and a privilege inherent in the exercising ofour freedom ofexpression and in our efforts to gain greater knowledge of ourselves..(http://www.aaple.com/aaple/). Netherton could have decided at some.point that what he was running a religion, but he hasn't done that.

Ifmotivation does not count, then maybe some ofthese entrepreneurs have unwittingly created NRMs, and maybe we should let them know, and include them in our NRM research. They should at least have the status ofquasi-religions. As we recall, quasi religions may be defined as "collectives in which organizational and ideological tension and ambiguity regarding the group's worldview, perspective, and regimen are profitably used to facilitate affiliation as well as commitment" (Bromley & Bracey, 1998, p. 141). Why is it that so many individuals who can easily take advantage ofthe quasi-religion option do not utilize it? They could have easily fit into that niche, but they clearly are not interested in doing that. So we have to conclude that in this case it is the motivation, and not the content ofbeliefs, that counts and makes the difference between religion, quasi religion, and non-religion.

SCINETOLOGY AND THE NRM SCHOLARS

There is a clear skew, superficiality, or selectivity, in the way Scientology has been looked at by NRM scholars (e.g. Bromley & Bracey, 1998; Wilson, 1990). Assertions by NRM scholars may be questioned because they have consistently ignored some highly significant behaviors. Ifthese scholars indeed do not know about these activities then the state ofNRM research is pretty bad; ifthey do, and choose not to report, it's even worse. Have they decided that such activities are irrelevant? Then we should know about the for judgment in this case

Reading the scholarly literature one would rarely realize that Scientology is run by franchise, that it uses hundreds ofsecular fronts, that it offers a "free personality test" to recruit clients, that it markets such a secular.seam as the Purification Rundown, that it uses hundreds oftrademarks and claims trade secrets, or that it has an extraordinary criminal record. The fronts business is a major activity and a major source ofincome for Scientology, but is totally ignored by most NRM scholars (e.g. Wilson, 1970, 1990) or presented as humanitarian activity. This is how Scientology's fraudulent fronts are described by one scholarly source: "Another set oforganizations has as its primary objective delivering Hubbard's technology, so that conventional social institutions may benefit from Scientology's knowledge" (Bromley and Bracey, 1998,p. 148). These authors also call the fronts "non-profit". One wonders whether a Scientology press release would have been worded differently.

The organization we read about in the scholarly literature is not the Scientology we know, or could get to know by simply stepping into one ofits many sales outlets around the world. Wilson (1990), for example, reports in great detail on what he regards as its religious beliefs and mentions the doubts about Hubbard's 1953 conversion from secular psychotherapy to religion, but ignores most other aspects ofthe organization's activities.

Documents uncovered during litigation involving Scientology have impressed judges and the media. They have had no effect on scholars. What has shocked judges is ofno interest to scholars, as shown by one reaction ofa scholar to ajudge. Wilson (1990, p. 247)

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 criticizes "Mr. Justice Latey who, gratuitously, gave an open court judgment, following a private hearing, in which he declared Scientology to be 'corrupt, sinister and dangerous'. Wilson cites as his source The Times of24 July 1984. Quite clearly, Wilson has not read the full text ofLatey's decision, and relies on media reports.

I would urge you to read the actual (http://www.holysmoke.orglcos/latey.htm) and then you will realize that Justice Latey was first, a) careful in preserving the privacy of the parties involved, b) extremely kind and positive in his comments about the individual . members ofthe family, Scientologists included, and c) critical in his comments about the

Scientology organization, which he encountered onthat occasion for thefirst time ever. To back up his criticism, Justice Latey appended several authentic Scientology documents to his decision, which are cited in above. We can only assume that Wilson, and other NRM scholars, have chosen not to read the decision or the documents. While Wilson seems to get his information from The Times, and does not realize what so horrified Justice Latey, we can read the 1982 Mission Holders Conference and the TR-L document. We all know these documents by now, ifwe don't, then we just haven't done our basic homework.

Our conclusion must be that research reports which ignore such significant aspects of a phenomenon under review should not be taken too seriously, but there may be even more serious conclusions. What we see here is a strange case ofprofessional negligence, or professional malpractice. In professional medical malpractice, misdiagnosis logically leads to the wrong treatment. We are still looking at the diagnosis, or rather the misdiagnosis stage. Let us take, for example the 1982 Mission Holders Conference. This document was made public in 1984, not.very recently. Itprovides us with an unusual opportunity to observe the Scientology organization, but no one in the businessseems to'have read it. Another relevant document oddly ignored is TR-L, reviewed above. We mustassume that any scholar who has ever done any research on Scientology must have noticed the Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA). Theimplications in the case ofthe aCA, which are straightforward, have been ignored. AndNRM scholars

such as Bromley and Bracey (1998) seem to be totally unaware ofthe extensive and exceptional criminal record ofthis organization. NRM scholars need to be told that the use offronts is not universal or even common among religions. Inreality, it is extremely unusual. We should also recall that most NRMs or evenmost old religions have no criminal record.

In addition to the scholarly writings reviewed above, we thatsome NRM scholars jumped with both feet into the world ofaction, with total mobilization in the service of the Scientology organization. They have served as character witnesses and providing covers and alibis. Their actions have been public and political.

There are situations when a public figures and organizations urgently needs an alibi. If you are Jorg Raider, ofthe Austrian Freedom Party, and you are being accused ofneo Nazi or proto-fascist leanings or sympathies, one way ofgetting yourselfan alibi is to get a Jew to work for you. Jorg Haider found his Jew. He was Peter Sichrovsky, a well known, bright, and articulate Austrian journalist ofJewish descent, who was serving for a while as secretary-general and representative in the European Parliamen for the Austrian Freedom Party. How is this related to Scientology?

On April 19, 1999 a conference was held at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California, under the heading ofi'The Role ofReligious Pluralism in Contemporary Society". The conference sponsored by The "International Commission on Freedom

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 ofConscience" and hosted by R. Newton Malony. It was organized by Scientology, if you haven't guessed already, and one ofthe speakers at this affairwas none other than the same Peter Sichrovsky, who is very concerned, like all ofus, about "religious pluralism in contemporary society".

This conference was one small event,part ofthe far-ranging operation designed to create' an aura ofnormality and respectability around Scientology. The aim is to build a wall of , legitimacy which will serve to exonerate and exculpate Scientology when the need arises . Ofcourse, any scholarly research' on Scientology within the framework ofthe study of religion gives it a powerful alibi,but very few NRM scholars have actually done that.

Ifwe look a little closer at the wayScientology has been treated by scholars we encounter twokinds oftexts. In addition to scholarly books and articles, we fmd a secondkind, . made up ofa variety ofstatements solicited by Scientology for various public uses, including legal proceedings.

These testimonials are rarely cited in the academic literature, and probably do not appear on a CV list ofpublications. These two kinds oftexts contain two different viewpoints. While the first group of published as academic works, emphasizes the organization's uniqueness,'and any comparisons to the second group emphasizes its similarity to a variety ofhistorically well-known religions, some quite , ancient.

The testimonial literature supporting Scientology's claim to the religion label is unique and unprecedented. The texts are written in the form oflegal depositions, stating the author's qualifications as an academic and sometimes as a member ofthe mainstream . Protestant clergy. Some of cite classical sources in the fields ofsociology history, but most ofthose giving these statements have not published scholarly research on Scientology. When scholars address their colleagues, they express the level ofdoubt and reflect the level ofcomplexity or ambiguity we expect from scholarship. Freed from the shackles ofscholarship (or so.they imagine) NRM experts are ready to throw all caution to the winds. In contrast to the formal academic works, which sometimes raise doubts about Scientology's authenticity as a religion and its credibility as an organization, the testimonials often sound like official press releases. They are seamless, glossy, . products, and one has search hard for nuances or discrepancies. The seal ofapproval is given ina clear, certain voice, with no doubts, hesitation, or ambiguity.

. . In this collection ofstatements, the question ofthe religion label is addressed directly. The discussion is in terms ofthe substantive definition ofreligion, and the answer is in the affirmative on substantive grounds, i.e. the content ofbeliefs and practices. Scientology maintains an Internet site (www.religion2000.deIENG/index.html) where some testimonials can be found. The site includes statements by such leading academics as James A. Beckford (1981), Alan W. Black (1996), Gary D. Bouma (1979), Irving Hexham (1978),J. Gordon Melton (1981), and GeoffreyParrinder (1977). Parrinder and Melton are presented as ordained Methodist ministers.

Melton (1981) says that Scientology is "...a religion in the fullest ofthe word. It has a well thought-out doctrine, including abeliefin a Supreme Being ...a system ofworship and liturgy, an extensive pastoral counseling program...Its beliefs, worship and relationship to God as a Supreme Being is further evidenced in the Church's program of pastoral care, group worship, its community life and program ofspiritual growth...regularly holds Sunday worship services" (see http://www.neuereligion.de/ENG/melton/pageOl.htm). The famous 1983 decision which granted Scientology tax exemption in Australia stated: "The essence ofScientology is a

http ://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 _ ...... \.--r------

beliefin reincamation and concern with the passageof'thetan' or the spirit or soul ofman through eight 'dynamics' and the ultimate release ofthe 'thetan'from the bondage ofthe body"(High Court ofAustralia, 1983, p. 58). Not a word about"God as a Supreme Being". Melton's statement clearly runs' counter to most reports in the scholarly literature (e.g. Bromley & Bracey, 1998; Wilson, 1970, 1990),but there are otherthings to wonder about in this web site. Alan W. Blackcompares Scientology to the Unitarian Church, Melton compares it to the Methodist Church, and Parrinder is reminded ofancient Egyptian religion, Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and even Freemasonry. -. . As indicated above, scholars offering their imprimatur to Scientology emphasize its commonality with well-known historical religions. The commonality discourse becomes the first line ofdefense, as the experts tell us with a straight face that what looks like a deviation from the norms ofestablished religions and common decency is actually the norm, and Methodists (Jews, Roman Catholics) are just as bad, only hidingtheir sins more effectively. Bromely (1994, see www.scientology.org/copyrightlbromley.htm) finds a great deal of.commonality between Scientology and many religions,old and new, such as Catholicism, Christian Science, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Rosicrucianism, and Theosophy. When it comes to financial procedures, Bromley fmds a commonality with Buddhist temples, Jewish synagogues, Protestant denominations, and Catholic priests (see www.scientology.org/copyright/bromley.htm). He would have us believe that ScientologyisjustIike Buddhism, Judaism Catholicism in asking for fees. j'In some parts ofthe Jewish tradition an annual fee is paid for synagogue membership" The tiny difference, which Bromley apparently has not noticed, is that in Scientology there can be no participation inany activities without a fee, unlike Judaism or Catholicism. Inmany real religions there are services thatentail a fee, but some contacts and services are free. Does Scientology provide any services without a fee? While the practice offee-for-service in the case ofrites ofpassage is common in religions, in Scientologynothing is free, and gaining membership is defmed by financial contracts and payments only.

Bryan Wilson (1994, http://www.scientology.org/copyright/wilson.htm) compared Scientology to Christianity, "Gnosticism" (which probably never existed), Christian Science, LDS, Pentecostal groups, Judaism, and Buddhism (cf. Wilson, 1990). In his testimonial, Wilson goes on to suggest that Scientology's esoteric texts could be compared to the Jewish.Kabbala tradition. Such claims are absurd, and indicate total ignorance (or wilfull deception) because Kabbala texts have never been claimed as "trade secrets", and were never offered by franchise.

When Jeffrey Hadden (1994) was asked to defend Scientology, he waxed mystical and produced some esoteric knowledge ofhis own. In his affidavit he stated that "Moses learned the secret name ofGod on MountSinai and that knowledgehas been shouldered orally [sic] through the ages by a few Jewish mystics who are able faithfully to discern the Kabbalah. Christ preached to the masses, but itwas to a select group ofdisciples that he disclosed secrets the kingdom" (seewww.scientology.org/copyright/hadden.htm).

We see that Wilson, Bromley and Hadden make the jump from esoteric knowledge trade secrets. While esoteric knowledge is found in many religions, the "trade secrets" has never been made about them.

As mentioned above, Bromley (see wwW.theta.comlcopyright/bromley.htm). Wilson (1994, www.theta.comlcopyright/wilson.htm). and Hadden (see www.scientology.org/copyright/hadden.htm). are among the NRM scholars who have defended Scientology's interests by offering legal depositions. We now know that other scholars have either testified in court or submitted documents in support ofthe

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 organization's claims to legitimacy.

I had an opportunity to appreciate howintimate the contacts between the OSA and NRM scholars were at the SSSR meeting in Montreal in 1998. The OSA sometimes sends its operatives to scholarly conferences, and I recognized two men as OSA operatives, because they were in the conference exhibit area handing out glossy Scientology literature. Later on they attended sessions and took part in discussions, identifying themselves clearly. At some point, passing through the exhibit area, I could see these two ' men exchanging warm hugs with a well-published NRM scholar. This was done in public, not behind closed doors, and reflected solidarity camaraderie. What is remarkable is thatthe scholar involved has never publicly collaborated with Scientology in any way, such as giving expert testimony or supporting a front. Neither has this scholar published any researchon the organization.

NRM scholars have supported Scientologyfronts at least since the 1980s.The American Conference on Religious Movements, a Scientology front, is mentioned in the December 1989 memo by Jeffrey K. Hadden reporting on collaboration with NRMs(Hadden, 1989). Some ofthe names on the New CAN listofaccomplices can be found n a publication issued by the Friends ofFreedom, a Scientology front started by George Robertson around 1990. Friends ofFreedom were Gordon Melton, Eileen Barker, David Bromley, Jeffrey Haddon (sic),.James Richardson, and Anson Shupe. Friends ofFreedom soon disappeared from the scene, and later George Robertson had a role in the founding ofAWARE in 1992 (Beit-Hallahmi, 2001). Scientology was actively involved in the preparation ofFrom The Ashes (Lewis, 1994), published byAWARE.

The New CAN affair, reported above, where the identity ofan "anti-cult" organization was taken over Scientology, then offering information about "dangerous cults"; brings out in all ofus a reaction ofrevulsion, shock, and horror. This is the common reaction, butit is uncommon among NRM scholars. As it turns out, the New CAN advertises itself as having inits service a listof"professional referral sources". And these "professional referrals" include NRM scholars Dick Anthony, William Bainbridge, Eileen Barker, DavidBromley, Jeffrey Hadden, Newton Malony, James Richardson, John Saliba, and Stewart Wright (check the cultawarenessnetwork.orgsite). Newton Malony is more than justa "professional referral source". He acts as a spok esman for Scientology when he quite naturally "sees the-new CAN as doing positive work" (see The CAN affair isa play in the theater ofcruelty and sadism, and it takes a large measure ofcruelty to take part in -

THE SCHOLARLY POSITION.ON DECEPTION

Wallis (1984, p. 129) referred to something called 'heavenly deceit', allegedly used by Scientology "to secure funds or recruits, or to defend the movement" (p. 129). The description (orjustification) offered by Wallis is broad enough to cover all of Scientology's activities. "To secure funds or recruits, or to defend the movement" covers everything that has ever been done in the name ofScientology.

What is Heavenly Deceit? What is it supposed to mean or explain? What is 'heavenly' about it? The operational definition of'heavenly deceit' seems to be that in order to promote a religious message, specific acts ofdeceit must be carried out. The end sanctifies the means, and the end in this case is the survival ofa religious message. This is the 'heavenly' part. What about the 'deceit' part?

The 'heavenly deceit' notion means that we should not use the normal criterion of

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/joumallmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 truthfulness for certain observations and statements. Let us leave aside for the moment the question ofcommon decency, and just focus on logic. Does anybody know when a Scientology statement or action is or isn't 'heavenly deceit'? In this specific case, can we ask when does Scientology engage or not engage in 'heavenly deceit', and how can you tell? Any 'heavenly deceit' is still deceit, and no amount ofheavenlinesswill change that. Is there something that distinguishes 'heavenly deceit': from simple criminality? Apparently, it takes an extremely sophisticated scholar to tell where 'heavenly deceit' ends. and 'earthly deceit' begins,Does Scientologyengage in heavenly deceit when it presents us with the so-called Oxford Capacity Analysis, Dianetics, "auditing", or the New CAN? When do Scientologists do anythingwhich is not 'heavenly deceit?

Should we take Scientology seriously when it offers information on "dangerous cults"? When and why should we take seriously anything coming from Scientology? When are they telling the truth? How do they decide when to tell the truth? Do we know when they are not lying? When they are not presenting a false front? Are we·ever going to catch them telling the truth? The unsophisticated targets ofdeceit don't care ifit is heavenly or earthly. It's just their money, and their lives, at stake.

Scholars want to play a role in the authentication process, which can be compared to the authentication ofworks ofart,but they seem unwilling to challenge any group'sclaim for the religion label, thus creating inpractice a universal scholarly imprimatur. Here NRM scholars seem to follow the self-definition or self-determination principle, a truly commendable modernist and post-modernist ideal. In the fuzzy and unregulated domain ofprivate salvation, including religion and psychotherapy, only the identities chosen by individuals should count. This implies that we should listen to Scientology's representatives and earnestly accept what they say about themselves, suspending our tendency to doubt and analyze.

In this case, ifwe have to take the religion claim at face value, then we should also take at face value claims about being Freudian and about doing polio research. We know that Hubbard once claimed expertise in nuclear physics, so is he part ofthe history ofthat field too? When Hubbard was operating a Freudian Foundation, was Scientology (it was then already Scientology) part ofpsychoanalysis? When Hubbard called Dianetics "The Modem Science ofMental Health" (as the organization still does, fifty years later), was Dianetics part ofany known science? Or of"mental health"?

We can trust what Scientology says about its religious nature as much as we can trust what it says about the "Oxford Capacity Analysis" or "Clear" or the "Purification Rundown", or the New CAN. When Scientology operatives are talking about tenets of faith (Wilson, 1990) or applied religious philosophy, or religious technology, are they speaking truthfully or "outflowing false data effectively"? Wilson (1990), ofcourse, is happily unaware ofthe Oxford Capacity Analysis or the Purification Rundown, or the New CAN.

The "secular version" operation, where The Way To Happiness is offered as a secular beliefsystem, is another Scientology original. We have looked far and wide in the history ofreligions, from the Antoinistes (Dericquebourg, 1993) to the Zoroastrians, and

Still not find one single in which a religion was publicly propagating a secular version ofits ethical system. Ifyou know ofany religion that offers "secular versions" of its moral creed, please let me know. Do we know any religion that tries to promote Ita non-religious moral code, based entirely on common sense"? How about a secular, improved version ofthe Ten Commandments?

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljoumaVmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 SCIENTOLOGY CLASSIFIED: REACHING A DECISION

As Greil (1996, p. 49) suggested, being considered a religious movement is "a cultural resource over which competing interest groups may vie..." giving "privileges associated in a given society with the religious label". Moreover, "the right to the religious label is a valuable commodity" (Greil, 1996, p. 52). Barker once suggested that the public religion/not religion debate, outside the ivory tower, is part ofnormal social discourse, and we should study it, not interfere with it: "It is not the task ofsocial science to draw .'the boundaries that society will-use" (Barker, 1994, p. 108). For Passas (1994), the concern about civil liberties is cause enough to give automatic immunity to any group claiming the religion label. That would be morally and intellectually irresponsible. We are not the government or the police. We do not enforce the law, but what do we tell ourselves and our colleagues?

Going back to the September 2001 deception case, we discover that questions we can raise about it are the same we have discussed all through this article. Why a religious organization offering "to relieve spiritual suffering" use a "mental health" front?

The Scientology masquerading strategy uses two main covers. The "Mental Health" cover is more common; the religion covers much less so. Some scholars treat the masquerading strategy as merely a matter ofmarketing, a facade, behind whichhides the true essence of the organization, which is somehow religious. I see no logical (or other) reason to privilege that interpretation. We canjust as safely assume that behind the marketing facade there is just more marketing. Scientology lies about everything. Why should we assume that it is possessed by truthfulness attack when it comes to the profitable of religion?

Using the "mental health" cover raises another question. Scientology CEO David Miscavige stated on television in 1992 that "there area group ofpeople on this who find us to be a threat to their existence, and they will do everything in their power to stop us. And that is the mental health field" (Passas, 1994, p. 227). If"mental health" is the enemy, why utilize its trademark? Moreover, this historical pattern ofmasquerading runs counter to another major effort on the part ofthe organization. At least since the '1960s, Scientology has invested money and energy in a huge campaign designed to win official recognition in claims to be a religion. The most important victory inthis campaign was won in 1993, when, quite mysteriously, the United States Internal Revenue

Service Commissioner, Herb Goldberg, Jr. suddenly changed his mind and granted it tax exemption. We would expect the organization from that point on to celebrate this victory by dropping its secular masks and presenting itselfeverywhere as engaging in religious activities. This has not happened.

What we have discovered is that the September 2001 incident was not isolated but rather embedded in a consistent and unmistakable historical pattern. It demonstrated again that the Scientology organization is motivated and driven solely by sales and marketing considerations. What has been experienced by all ofus as a global nightmare was viewed by Scientology only as a great marketing opportunity. The pathetic lies offered by Scientology once it has been exposed were true to character.

Passas (1994) rightly advises caution when it comes to judging claims to the religion label: "...the resort to profitable endeavors and even illegal methods offinancing do not ipso facto justify the rejection ofreligious status...By no means do I purport to defend sophisticated offenders who set up a self-proclaimed "religion" simply to flout the law. Whenever good faith can be shown to be absent, religious and other types offraud ought

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/rnjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 -- . -

to be persecuted. Bad faith must be shown, however, and not assumed" (p. 218) .

What we have observed is a fifty-year history ofbad faith, in which a huge amount of energy and imagination has been invested in hundreds ofoperations aimed atdeception. This is a consistent and unmistakable historical pattern. In addition to hundreds offronts, we have observed numerous ways ofmasquerading. There can be no doubtthat all this has been a matter ofpolicy and strategy. When.addressing the outside world, the Scientology organization has making various claims, presenting itselfmost often as . engaged in the promotion of"mental health", sometimes offering prosperity and self improvement, and only rarely claiming the religion label.

The September 2001 incident is not only a truly representative and reliable sample of Scientology behavior.It is the emblematic story ofScientology, just like the New CAN affair and the polio affair ofthe 1950s. It is the same sadistic and cynical attempt to exploit vulnerability and gullibility, to get "the bereaved and injured"(Wallis, 1977, p. 158). We can only quote what Hannah Arendt had to say about the leaders ofsome totalitarian regimes:'"Their moral cynicism, their beliefthat everything is permitted, rests on the solid conviction that everything is possible" (Arendt, 1963, p. 387) .

Scientology's own documents show an organization which is blatantly commercial, blatantly secular and blatantly predatory, as well as blatantly fraudulent. As Hubbard 'himself said in 1962, the religion lahel"is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors" (Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, HCOPL, 29 October 1962). Scientology will use the religion label it is convenient, and a secular label when it suits better. It will use the cross (as it has done in publications and displays on buildings) just like it has used Sigmund Freud's

The preponderance ofthe evidence indicates that the religion claim is merely a tax evasionruse and a figleaffor a hugely profitable enterprise, where the logic of profitability and profit-makingdictatesallactions. Scientology is inreality a holding company, a business empire earning profits from .a variety ofsubsidiaries. It is guided by considerations ofeconomic consequences and benefits, a strict business strategy.

The assertion that Scientology isa misunderstood religion seems less tenable than competing assertion, that it a front for a variety ofprofit-making schemes, most of

which are totally fraudulent. The question is only whether Scientology is "an ordinary profit-making enterprise", as Passas & Castillo (1992) suggest whether "Scientology's purpose is making money by means legitimate and illegitimate" (US District Court, Southern District ofNew York, 92 Civ. 3024 (PKL) see www.planetkc.comlslothlscildecis.time.html). The most charitable interpretation would be that it is a profit making organization; a less charitable one that it is a criminal organization.The evidence for an explicit policy ofdeception makesit harder and harder to show any degree ofcharity.

The story ofHubbard and his brainchild deserves treatment by those who have written on famous impostors and great con men (Maurer, 1940/1999). Similar cases include the phenomenon of"psychic surgeons" in the Philippines, who prey on terminal cancer patients from the West, or the Dominion ofMelchizedek (a cyberspace seam, self described as a "recognized ecclesiastical and constitutional sovereignty, inspired by the Melchizedek Bible"). In the context ofUnited States cultural history, Hubbard seems like a combination ofthe best-known qualities ofRoy Cohn (Von Hoffman, 1988) and Lyndon LaRouche (King, 1990). The similarity between Scientology and the LaRouche organization in ofideology and activities seems far from than trivial, but has never

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftfjoumal/mjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 been noted.

Some ofthe scholars claiming that Scientology is some kind ofa religion have put their statements to an empirical test. Both Bainbridge & Stark (1981) and Passas & Castillo (1992) did suggest that Scientology would become more religious in the future, just because its claims ofefficacy were absurd and unprovable. More than two decades later (for Bainbridge & Stark, 1981) and more than a decade later (for Passas & Castillo, 1992) .these predictions have turned to be totally wrong. Scientology has not become more . religious in any discernible way since 1981 or 1992. It is as much a religion today as it has ever been, and as it will ever be.

REFERENCES ...... Arendt, H. (1963). The Origins ofTotalitarianism. Cleveland, OH: World Book Co.

Ayella, M. (1990). "They must be crazy": Some difficulties in researching "Cults". American Behavioral Scientist; 33, 562-577.

Bainbridge, W.S. & Stark, R. (1980). Scientology: To be perfectly Clear. Sociological Analysis, 41, 128-136.

Barker, E. (1991). But is it a genuine religion? Religion and the Social Order, 4,

. Bednarowski, M.F. (1995). The Church ofScientology: Lightning rod for cultural boundary conflicts. In T. Miller (ed.) America's Alternative Religions. Albany, NY: SUNYPress.

Behar, R. (1986). The prophet and profits ofScientology. Forbes, 138 (9), 314-322.

Behar, R. (1991). The thriving cult ofgreed and power. Time, May 6, 52-60.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. Prolegomena to the Psychological Study ofReligion. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 1989.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1992). Despair and Deliverance: Private Salvation in Contemporary Israel, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1996). Psychoanalytic Studies ofReligion: Critical Assessment and Annotated Bibliography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press,1996.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1998). Illustrated Encyclopedia ofActive New Religions. Rosen Publishing: New York.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (1998). Dear colleagues: Integrity and suspicion in NRMresearch. Unpublished.

Beit-Hallahmi, B. (2001). '0 truant muse': Collaborationism and research integrity. In B. Zablocki & T. Robbins (eds.) Misunderstanding Cults. Toronto: University ofToronto Press.

Beit-Hallahmi,B. and Argyle, M. (1997). Psychology ofReligious Behaviour, Belief,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournallmjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 and Experience. London: Routledge.

Bryant, A. (2000) . Hollywood goes Wall Street. Newsweek, August 7.

Bromley, D. & Bracey, M. (1998). Religionastherapy, therapy as religion: The Church ofScientology as a quasi-religious therapy. In W. Zellner & M. Petrowsky (eds.) Sects, Cults. and Spiritual Communities: A Sociological Analysis. Westport: Praeger Publishers. -. . Burkholder, lR. (1974). "The law knows no heresy": Marginal religious movements and the courts. In LI. Zaretsky & M.P. Leone (eds.) Religious Movements in Contemporary America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Cleckley, H. (1976). The Mask ofSanity. St.Louis, MO: Mosby.

Clark, K.(1955) . Prejudice and Your Child .Boston: Beacon Press.

Cole, lR.I. (1998). The Baha'i faith in America as panopticon, 1963-1997. Journalfor theScientific Study ofReligion, 37,

Dericquebourg, R. (1993). Les Antoinistes. Paris: Editions Brepols.

Eliade, M. (1959). The Sacred and the Profane. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

England, RW. (1954). Some aspects ofChristian Science as reflected in letters of testimony. American Journal ofSociology, 59, 448-453.

Foster, J.G. (1971). Enquiry Into the Practice and Effects ofScientology. House of Commons Report. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

Fox, M. (1971). Religion USA: Religion and Culture by way ofTime Magazine. lA: Listening Press.

Frantz, D. (1997a). Taxes and tactics: Behind an LRS. reversal?A special report. Scientology's puzzling journey from tax rebel to tax exempt. New York Times, March 9.

Frantz, D. (1997b). Church ofScientology reached agreement with I.R.S. New York Times, December 31.

Freud, S. (1915/1916/1963). Introductory Lectures To Psychoanalysis. In The Complete Psychological Works ofSigmund Freud, Vol. XV. London: The Hogarth Press.

Friedland, lA. (1985). Constitutional issues in revoking religious tax exemptions: Church ofScientology ofCalifornia V. Commissioner. University ofFlorida Law Review, 37,565-589.

Gardner, M. (1957). Fads andFallacies In the Name ofScience. New York: dover.

Greil, A.L. (1996). Sacred claims: The "cult controversy" as a struggle over the right to the religious label. Religion and the Social Order, 6,47-63.

Greil, A.L. & Rudy, D.R (1990) . On the margins ofthe sacred. In T. Robbins & D. Anthony (eds.) In Gods We Trust: New Patterns ofReligious Pluralism. New Brunswick,

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 NJ: Transaction.

Hadden, lK. (1989). Memorandum, December 20, 1989.

Hansen, S. (1997). Did Scientology strike back? The American Lawyer. June.

Heins, M. (1981). 'Other people's faiths': The Scientology litigation and the justicability . ofreligious fraud. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly, 9, 153-197.

Higham, J. (1970). Strangers in the Land: Patterns ofAmerican Nativism 1860-1925. New York: Atheneum.

High Court ofAustralia (1983). The Church ofthe New Faith v. The Commissionerfor Payroll Taxes.

Hopkins, J.M. (1969). Scientology: Religion or racket? Christianity Today, November 7, 6-9; November 21, 10-13.

Home, W.W. (1992). The two faces ofScientology. American Lawyer, July/August.

Hubbard, L.R. (1956/1983). Scientology: The Fundamentals ofThought . Los Angeles: Bridge Publications.

James, W. (1902). The Varieties ofReligious Experience. New York: Macmillan.

Kent, S.A. (1999). The globalization ofScientology: Influence, control and opposition in transnational markets. Religion, 29, 147-169.

King, D. (1990). Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism. New York: doubleday.

Lewis, J.R. (ed.) (1994). From the Ashes: Making Sense ofWaco.Lanham, MD; Rowman & Littlefield.

MacLaughlin, J. & Gully, A. (1998). Church ofScientology probes Herald reporter Investigation follows pattern ofharassment. Boston Herald, March 19.'

Malko, G. Scientology: The Now Religion. New York: Dell, 1970.

Mallia.J. (1998a).Inside the Church ofScientology; Powerful church targets fortunes, souls ofrecruits. Boston Herald, March 1.

Mallia.J, (1998b). Judge found Hubbard lied about achievements. Boston Herald, March 3.

Mallia, J. (1998c). Scientology reaches into schools through Narconon. Boston Herald, March 3.

Mallia, 1.(1998c). Church, enemies wage war on Internet battlefield; Copyright laws used to silence online foes. Boston Herald, March 4.

Maurer, D.W. (1940/1999). The Big Con. New York: Random House.

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaftljournallmjrlbeit.htmI 18109/2003 ------

Meissner, W.W. (1978). The Paranoid Process. New York: lagon Aronson.

Melton, J.G. (1999). Encyclopedia ofAmerican Religions. Detroit, MI: Gale Research.

Miller, R Barefaced Messiah: The True Story ofL. Ron Hubbard. New York; Holt, 1987.

.N etherton, M. (1978). Past Lives Therapy. New York: William Morrow.

Otto, R (1923iI950).The Idea ofthe Holy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Passas, N. (1994). The market for gods and services: Religion, commerce, and deviance. Religion and the Social Order, 4, 217-240.

Passas, N. & Castillo, M.E. (1992). Scientology and its 'clear' business. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 10, 103-116.

Polmar, N. & Allen, T.B. (1996). Spy Book: The Encyclopedia ofEspionage . New York: Random House.

Richardson, J.T. (1983). Financing new religions: A broader view. In E. Barker (ed.) OfGods and Men: New Religious Movements in the West. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.

Robins, R.S. & (1997). Political Paranoia: The Psychopolitics ofHatred . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Roder, T., Kubillus, V. & Burwell, A. (1995). Psychiatrists: The Men Behind Hitler. Los Angeles: Freedom Publishing.

Robbins, T. (1988). Profits for prophets: Legitimate and illegitimate economic practices in new religious movements. In IT. Richardson (ed.) Money and Power in the New Religions. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press. c Russell, R. (1999). Scientology's revenge. New Times Los Angeles. September 9-15.

Sappell, J. & Welkos, RW. (1990). The Scientology story. Los Angeles Times, June 24 29.

Schwarz, S. (1976). Limiting religious tax exemptions: When should the Church render unto Caesar? University ofFlorida Law Review, 29,50-103.

Senn, S. (1990). The prosecution ofreligious fraud. Florida State University Law'Review, 17, 325-352. '

Straus, R, (1986). Scientology 'ethics':Deviance, identity and social control in a cult-like social world. Symbolic Interaction, 9, 67-82.

Von Hoffinan, N. (1988). Citizen Cohn. New York: Doubleday.

Wallis, R The Road To Total Freedom: A Sociological Analysis ofScientology. New York: Columbia University Press, 1976. .

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journaVmjr/beit.html 18/09/2003 Wallis, R. (1979). Salvation and Protest. New York: St. Martin Press.

Wallis, R. (1984). The Elementary Forms ofthe New Religious Life. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Weiss, B.L. (1988). Many Lives, Many Masters. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Westin, A.F. (1963). The John Birch Society?E962. In D. Bell (ed.), The Radical Right. ,.New.York: Doubleday & Co.

Wallace, A.F.C. (1966). Religion: an Anthropological View. New York: Random House.

Wilson, B. (1970). Religious Sects. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

Wilson, B. (1982). Religion in Sociological Perspective, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Wilson, B. (1990). The Dimensions ofSectarianism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Woolger, R.J. (1987). Other Lives, Other Selves. New York: Bantam.

Note: .This is a revised version ofa paper presented to the 1999 annual meeting ofthe ' Society for the Scientific Study ofReligion, Boston, November 1999. The author gratefully acknowledges valuable information and critical comments provided by Eileen Barker, Anthony J. B1asi, David G. Bromley, J.R.H. Cole, Ryan Jonathan Cook, Lorne Dawson, Nilli Diengott, Michael J. Donahue, Mike Garde, Jeffrey K. Hadden, Irving Hexham, Massimo Introvigne, Stephen A. Kent, Edward C. Lehman, Jr., Harriet C. Lutzky, H. Newton Malony, J. Gordon Melton, Wayne L. Proudfoot, Bryan Rennie, Tom Robbins, Michele Rosentha1, Ju1ius R. Rubin, Brigitte Schoen, William Shaffir, Stephen Sharot, Mark Silk, Ramzi Suleiman, Ted Daniels, and Benjamin Zablocki.

MJR Homepage

http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjrlbeit.html 18/09/2003 . -----

General Report on Scientology

My name is Jonathan Caven-Atack. I reside at Avalon, Cranston Road, East Grinstead, West Sussex, RHl9 3HQ. I was born on 5 June 1955.

HTML and links by Tilman Hausherr and Expertise

1. I was a member ofthe Church ofScientology from December 1974 to October 1983. During that time I undertook the equivalent of24 ofthe 27 available "levels" ofDianetic and Scientology "auditing" ("auditing" is supposedly a form ofcounselling). I also completed courses related to "auditor" or counsellor training as well ascourses in recruitment and administration. As a part ofmy "indoctrination" (the word used by Hubbard for training), I read more than 20 ofScientology founder L. RonHubbard's textbooks and listened to about 150 taped Hubbard lectures..I received "auditing" and "auditor" training at Scientology Missions Churches in Birmingham, Manchester and atthe British headquarters at Saint Hill, near East Grinstead.

2. In January 1983, the Church ofScientology published a list of611 people who had been Suppressive Persons" (JCA-1). Shortly thereafter, I was informed that one ofmy employees had been similarly "declared a Suppressive Person", and shown Scientology Policy Directive 28, "Suppressive Act - Dealing with a Declared Suppressive Person" (JCA-2). This order forbids Scientologists any contact with any person "declared Suppressive". This policy is known Scientology as "disconnection". For six months, I wrote letters questioning the "Suppressive Person declare" issued on my employee. During that time I made enquiries ofthe Master at or Ethics Officer, at Saint Hill, ofthe Special Unit, ofthe International Justice Chief, ofthe Executive Director International and ultimately ofL. Ron Hubbard. The responses I were evasive.

3. In September 1983, I decided to conduct my own investigation ofthe Church ofScientology. I was unwilling to have my communication controlled and my freedom ofassociation denied, and uneasy with the attitude ofScientology's new management, who described themselves as "tough" and "ruthless" (JCA-3), and unhappy at the high price charged for Dianetic and Scientology services ("auditing", for example, had risen from 6 pounds per hour in 1978 to over 100 pounds per hour) (JCA-4).

4. Since my resignation from the Church ofScientology, in October 1983, I have assembled a large collection ofScientology and Hubbard related materials, and interviewed well over a hundred-former members, including a number offormer Hubbard aides. I have also read thousands ofpages ofcourt rulings, govemmentenquiry reports, affidavits and sworn testimony relating to Hubbard and Scientology. This research led to the publication, in 1990, ofmy book A Piece ofBlue Sky, which is a history ofHubbard and his organizations. This book has been cited as a principal source of reference in academic papers by professor ofsociology and history ofreligion Stephen Kent ("International Social Control by the Church ofScientology", presented at the Society for the Scientific Study ofReligion, November 1991) (JCA-5) and by professor ofneuropsychiatry Louis Jolyon West ("Psychiatry and Scientology", presented as the "Distinguished Psychiatrist" lecture, American Psychiatric Association Annual Meeting, Washington DC, 6 May 1992) (JCA-6).

5. I have been retained in connection with the preparation ofmany court actions in which consideration ofScientology has arisen. In 1984, I assisted in assembling documents as evidence in a child custody caseput before Mr Justice Latey ("Re: Wards B & G"). In 1987, I provided documents and affidavits in the successful defence ofRussell Miller's biography ofHubbard, Bare-Faced Messiah, heard before Mr Justice Vinelott, in the English High Court. I also prepared documents for

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 the defence ofMiller's book in the USA, Canada and Australia. I have been consulted by litigants in the US, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Italy, Switzerland.Spain and the UK. In these cases, I have prepared documents, recommended relevant documents for discovery, and contacted or . recommended witnesses.

6. I was the principal researcher for Russell Miller's Bare-Faced Messiah, and was also consulted by Bent Corydon for his L.Ron Hubbard: Messiah or Madman and by Stewart Lamont for his Religon Inc. I was the principal researcher for the chapter on Scientology in Jean Ritchie's Secret World of Cults. I was also the principal researcher for BBC Panorama and TVS programmes about Scientology (both broadcast I I'have been consulted by television and radio producers, and by journalists throughout the world. L.Ron Hubbard's intent:

7. Scientology was devised by L.Ron Hubbard as a means ofgaining authoritarian control over those deceived into joining any ofhis many organizations. Hubbard constructed a set ofhypnotic techniques which masquerade as therapy and create progressive psychological dependency upon the organizations ofScientology. Hubbard also hid behind the.pretence ofreligion.

8. I give evidence regarding the techniques commonly employed by Scientology organizations to recruitfollowers, to create and maintain their loyalty and to sell them courses, supposed counselling, Scientology films, tapes, books and "Special Properties" (highly priced special editions ofHubbard works and Hubbard memorabilia). Although I have no qualification in psychology or psychiatry, I have had contact with several hundred former Scientologists in the last ten years, and feel able to estimate the effect ofScientology upon these former members. L.Ron Hubbard and the claims ofDianetics andScientology

9. Despite possession ofa massive archive ofHubbard's private papers;including numerous handwritten and illustrated black magic rituals and accounts ofHubbard's extensive drug abuse (JCA-7), Scientology management still deceive Scientologists by perpetuating Hubbard's fictitious claims about his life. Scientology materials make many false claims, including the following: that Hubbard was a wounded and decorated war hero (JCA-8, JCA-9) he sufferedfrom an ulcer (leA-I0, JCA-H) aridnever saw combat (JCA-12); that Hubbard was a "nuclear physicist" (JCA-B) he failed a course in "atomic and molecular" physics which was part ofthe degree he failed to complete (JCA-14); that Hubbard had studied for years asa teenager with holy men in India, China and Tibet (JCA-I5, JCA-16, JCA-17) - he spent less than three weeks in China and did not visit India orTibet (JCA-18, JCA-I9, lCA-20). These are a few ofthe many deceptions created by Hubbard and perpetuated by the cynical managers ofScientology. Gerald Armstrong and Vaughn and Stacey Young were formerly in charge ofScientology's immense "Hubbard Archive" and can testify to this deliberate deception.

I O. After a chequered career as the author ofadventure stories, Hubbard released his first supposed therapy text, Dianetics: the Modem Science ofMental Health, in 1950 (JCA-21). This book is still sold by the Church ofScientology, which claims sales in the millions.

11. Dianetics was in fact a reworking oftechniques abandoned by Freud, where traumatic memories are supposedly re-experienced (JCA-22). In the book Dianetics, Hubbard asserted that memories of physical pain or unconsciousness ("engrams") are lithe single and sole cause ofaberration and psycho-somatic illness" (ibid, p.68). Such buried traumata supposedly cause people to react to

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 situations without conscious reflection and constitute a "reactive mind".

12. Hubbard adopted Freud's notion that traumata form in "chains" and that it is necessary to find the earliest traumatic memoryon such a chain to relieve its symptoms. In Dianetics, Hubbardasserted that the earliest such traumatic memories are birth and prenatal experiences.

13. The book Dianetics describes a purported system oftherapy which will supposedly release the individual from compulsions, neuroses, repressions, psychoses, arthritis, bursitis, asthma, allergies, sinusitis, coronary trouble, high blood-pressure, the common cold, myopia, schizophrenia, manic depression, dipsomania (ibid, pp.5I-52, also p.92), visual and hearing deficiencies (ibid, pp. 10-11), dermatitis, migraine, ulcers (ibid, tuberculosis (ibid,p.93), morningsickness (ibid, p.156), conjunctivitis (ibid, p.126). Hubbard also wrote that his techniques would bring about an individual with "complete recall ofeverything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied", who would be capable ofperforming a calculation which a "normal [person] would do in halfan hour, in ten or fifteen seconds" (ibid p.171). In later works, Hubbard also asserted that he had found psychological cures.for paralysis (JCA-23, p.9), blindness, cancer (JCA-24) and leukaemia (JCA-25, JCA-26), and that his techniques had even be to raise the dead (JCA-27, p.170).

14. In Dianetics: the Modem Science ofMental Health, Hubbard that his techniques would work on anyone not suffering from brain damage {JCA-21, p.17), and that the outcome oftherapy .would be a "Clear". A Clear would be free from the disabilities, and possessed ofthe capabilities, listed in foregoing paragraph. In 1971, in the Scientology publication "Advance!", the following claim was made: Clear has over 135 LQ., a vibrant personality, glowing health, good memory, amazing vitality, self-control, happiness and more.The most valuable thing you can do foryourself, and for your family, friends and Mankind is attain the state ofClear. Youcan achieve Clear - not in years but within months through the most advanced technology ofthe human spirit - Scientology" (JCA-28). A 1988 issue of"The Auditor", a Scientologymagazine, assertsthat "A Scientology CLEAR has: Over 135 IQ, Creative imagination, Amazing vitality, Deep relaxation, Good memory, Strong will power, Radiant health, Magnetic personality" (JCA-29). Such claims are repeatedly made in literature produced by the Church ofScientology. For instance, 1991 issue of Scientology's "Celebrity" magazine states: "Scientology auditing can help you - you can get A higher IQ to handle your problems... More energy to make money Better health ... More years to live." (JCA-30) , .

15. In 1952,Hubbard incorporated notions ofthe spirit (or "thetan") and reincarnation into his system. He asserted that.we have all existed as spiritual beings for trillions ofyears (by the 1970s, he was talking ofquadrillions). In the 1950s, Hubbard coined the phrase "Operating Thetan", meaning a spirit capable of separately from its human body ("exterior"). goal ofScientologists is to be "exterior with full perception". Hubbarddefined "Operating Thetan" asthe vability to be . causeknowinglyand at thought, life, form, matter, energy, space and tirne,subjective and objective." (JCA-31). Currently, eight "Operatirig Thetan" levels are available to Scientologists, most ofwhich consist ofa form of exorcism, sold to Scientologists for over 300 pounds per hour (JCA Scientologists come to believe that they are possessed by thousands ofspirits which can of course lead to mental illness.

16. Many ofthe fundamental ideas ofScientology can be found in the works ofbla:ck magician Aleister Crowley. Hubbard recommended Crowley books to his followers and called Crowley "my very good friend" (JCA-33). As with all other magical systems, Scientology seeks to stregthen the will ofthe individual so that the physical world and other people can be controlled by intention alone. Scientologists believe that by undergoing Hubbard's "processes" they will ultimately be able to order events through "postulates" or wishes. Hubbard promised godlike powers to his followers. The religious nature of Scientology

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanljlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 17. In a lecture given in 1952, Hubbard asserted: "In 1938 lcodified certain axioms and phenomena into what I called SCIENTOLOGY" (JCA-23, p.8). Factually, Hubbard had briefly lost control of Dianetics, so restyled his ideas "Scientology" (He was probably unaware that the word was already in use, meaning "pseudoscientific ideas"). In April 1953, Hubbard wrote tothe head of Hubbard Association ofScientologists, Helen O'Brien, asking for her opinion on "the religion angle" (JCA 34). In December 1953, Hubbard registered the Church of'Scientology, and a parent body called the Church ofAmerican Science, in Camden, New Jersey (JCA-35, JCA-36, JCA-37). In February 1954,

Hubbard's associate, Burton Farber.jncorporated the Church ofScientology ofCalifornia (JCA-38). Within a few years all organizations to Hubbard had been restyled "Churches" .of Scientology. These Churches tithed 20 percent oftheir income to Hubbard's Church ofAmerican Science (JCA-35). In March 1954, Hubbard announced that graduate auditors "can be given anyone ofthree or all ofthe following certificates: DOCTOR OF SCIENTOLOGY, FREUDIAN PSYCHO ANALYST, DOCTOR OF DIVINITY." (JCA-35),

18. Numerous claims have been made by Hubbard and his organizations for the religious nature of Scientology. In 1954, Hubbardsaid: "a Scientologist has a better rightto call himselfa priest, a minister, a missionary, a doctor ofdivinity, a faith healer or a preacher than any other man who bears the insignia ofreligion in the Western world" (JCA-38). In a Bulletin of 18 April 1967, Hubbard asserted that "Scientology is a religion by its basic tenets, practice, historical background and by the definition ofthe word "religion" itself... Scientology is ... Religious practice in that the of Scientology conducts basic servicessuch as Sermons at Church meetings, Christenings [sic Scientology makes no claim to be a Christian Church], Weddings and Funerals." (JCA-39). Ina Bulletin of4 May 1972, Hubbard asserted "Dianeticsis a science which applies to man, a living organism; and Scientology is a religion." (JCA-40). In the textbook What is Scientologyz.first published in 1978, Scientology is defined as "an applied religious philosophy" (JCA-17, p.3). Most Scientology textbooks contain a disclaimer as the following "This book is part ofthe works of L. Ron Hubbard, whodeveloped Scientology applied religious philosophy and Dianetics spiritual healing technology." (JCA-41).

19. The Church ofScientology offers a "Minister's Course" to its members (JCA-42). After two

/ weeks oftraining, Scientology ministers wear dog collars and the Sciento1ogy cross and conduct , Sunday services, weddings, naming ceremonies and funerals (JCA-43). The Church ofScientology has in the past commissioned religious experts such as E.G. Parrinder (JCA-44) and Frank Flinn (JCA-45) to prepare reports or give testimony to the effect that Scientology is a bona fide religion. The booklet "The Corporations ofScientology" (JCA-46)claims "In the Scientology religion, the scriptures are all the spoken and writtenwords ofL. Ron Hubbard". All Scientology organizations are licensed by the Religious TechnologyCenter, a California based corporation, and sign an agreement accepting that the Dianetics and Scientology teachings are "scripture" (JCA-47). Hubbard's "scriptures" are incontrovertible: "It is.hereafter firm Church policy that LRH [Hubbard] ISSUES ARE TO BE LEFT INTACT AS ISSUED [emphasis in original]. No one except LRH can revise his issues." (JCA-48). Since Hubbard's death in 1986, his work has been written in stone.

r 21. Scientology has been granted religious tax-exemption inAustralia and the USA. However, in Master ofthe Denning ruled thatScientology-t

Techniques of Persuasion and Selling

http://horne.snafu.de/tilmanlj/genera1.html 22/08/2003 Techniques

22. Scientology is a proselytizing faith and all Scientologists are termed "Field StaffMembers" and expected to effect conversions, The methods ofconversion are spelled out in the Hubbard memoranda reissued in the "Field StaffMember Kit" (JCA-51), in the "Registrar Drills" (JCA-52) and in "FSM Breakthrough New FSM TRs - Controlling a Conversation" (JCA-53). I was extensively trained in recruiting at the Birmingham Mission ofthe Church ofScientology, in 1975. The Field StaffMember is instructed to-discover through questioning what is "ruining" a person's life (termed "the ruin" by Hubbard) and to exploit any "fear ofworsening". Having brought the individual face to face with their weakness, the Scientology Field StaffMember "brings to understanding" - the that Scientology can solve whatever problem is disclosed.

23. In a tape-recorded lecture Hubbard said the following: "all the social machinery people have actually breaks down before direct intention. But the thing that causes difficulty in moving people along this line ofmethodology has a great deal to do with the invasion ofprivacy. I won't call it privacy because that dignifies it. You have to be willing to invade privacy, very definitely ... Ifyou have a hard time invading people's privacy, you'll have a hard time 8-Cing [controlling - "8-C", literally "infmite control"] them into a chair in an HAS Co-audit unit [Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist], first PE [Personal Efficiency Course], and so forth. Because you think they have rights. Nah [sic]! They don't have any rights! What do you mean? What do they have - has , rights? That machinery? Those dramatizations? Those computing circuits? You mean those things have rights? Hah! Pish-pash [sIc] ... Ifyou invade this guy's privacy that just walked in, believe me, he walks straight in." (JCA-54).

24. Hubbard asserted that every individual has a particular emotional level or "tone" (JCA-55, JCA 56), and during recruiting it is necessary to approximate the emotional condition ofthe would be recruit (Scientologists do elaborate role-playing ofemotional states, including the "Mood Training Routines"), so creating rapport. Using emotional manipulation, the individual is reduced to depressed condition where he or she will realize a desperate "need ofchange" in his or her life (JCA 57).

25. Hubbard called non-Scientologists "wogs" (JCA-58) or "raw meat" (JCA-59) and said that non members are "dead" in the "head" (JCA-60) - in a hypnotic daze and therefore easily controllable. Non-Scientologists are held be in the grip oftheir "Reactive minds" and so incapable oflogical decision. Consequently, Field StaffMembers are urged not to discuss the ideas ofScientology, but to play upon the emotional weaknesses ofthe potential recruit (JCA-51, JCA-61).

26. The most used method ofrecruitment in Scientology is the Oxford Capacity Analysis Personality Test or "OCA" (JCA-62). This derives from Scientology's "American Personality Analysis" ofthe early 1950s,which in turn was constructed from existing tests devised by psychologists. The OCA has no connection with Oxford, let alone Oxford University. The original test has long been outdated and was rewritten by individuals with no background in psychology or personality testing. Further, it is made clear in internal literature that far from being a "free" test, its function is solely to recruit people into Scientology(JCA-63).

27. Hubbard openly employed "hard-selling" techniques (JCA-51, under "hard sell", JCA-64). Sales staffundertake frequent (often daily) "hard-sell drilling". Scientology organizations use a printed manual called the "Hard Sell Reference Pack". I frequently experienced the use ofsuch techniques. For instance, on my first visit to the British headquarters, at Saint Hill, in August 1975, I was taken to a staffrecruiter at 11 p.m. and remained with her until about 1 a.m. My refusal to join Scientology's paramilitary "Sea Organization", which entails a "billion year" commitment (Scientologists believe in reincarnation), was met with progressively more stem entreaties. I was shown a Hubbard memorandum, which I was assured was entirely secret, which asserted that the

htto:/lhome.snafu.de/tilmanlj/genera1.html 22/08/2003 --- third world war was imminent and that the Church ofScientology would be the only organization capable ofsurviving this holocaust and governing the world beyond it. According to this memorandum, this was the real purpose the Sea Organization, despite Hubbard's published assertion that Scientology is "non-political" -: As a last stab, the recruiter told me that anyone who refuses to join the Sea Organization is insane.

28. On one occasion, between June and August 1982, I spent thirteen hours being given a sales interview by Scientologist Peter Buttery at my apartment in East Grinstead. In the same year, I was visited by the same Scientology salesman who had brought Scientologistmoney-Iender Lee Lawrence with him. They attempted to persuade me to borrow 7,000 pounds. The assertion was made that after "upper level" Scientology counselling it would be easy for me to recoup the money and pay back the loan andthe 30 percentperannum interest. Lawrence's loan applications had to be approved by Scientology (JCA-65).

29. Scientology sales staff,or "registrars", rapidly form a picture ofan individual's assets and borrowing capacity. I have dealt with many individuals whose fmancial security was undermined by their involvement with Scientology.

30. Scientologists are told that ifthey fail to undertake certain courses they will be "at risk" (JCA 66). Ominous warnings are often given to those who declare an intention to leave the Churches of Scientology (JCA-67).

31. Sophisticated sales techniques are squired by Scientology registrars on the "Registrar Salesmanship Course" (JCA-68), and through the application ofmaterial in the "Hard Pack" (JCA-64). Scientology registrars spend long hours "drilling" these techniques and learning how to overcome resistance (JCA-52). Such drilling continues throughout the registrar's career, especially after a failure to sell.

32 Hubbard made many extravagant and unfounded claims for Scientology and these are often used by registrars. For instance, in Flag Mission Order 375 Hubbard said: "Advanced Courses [in Scientology] are the most valuable service on the planet. Life insurance, houses, cars, stocks, bonds, college savings, all are transitory and impermanent .,. There is nothing to compare with Advanced Courses. Theyare infmitely valuable and transcend time itself" (JCA-69). In a magazine article, Hubbard said: "Forthousands ofyears men have sought the state ofcomplete spiritual freedom from the endless cycle ofbirth and death and sought personal immortality containing full awareness, memory and ability asa spirit independent ofthe flesh ... In Scientology this state has been attained. It has been achieved not on a temporary basis, subject to relapse, but on a stable plane offull awareness and ability, unqualified by accident or deterioration." (JCA-70).

33. The Scientologyattitude towards new recruits is unequivocal. In a 1959 Bulletin, which is still circulated, Hubbard said "NEVER let anyone simply walkout. Convince him he's loony ifhe doesn't gain on it [an auditing procedure] because that's the truth" (JCA-71). In a Policy Letter which is still a part ofmost Scientology courses, Hubbard said: "When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration ofthe universe - never permit an 'open-minded' approach ... Ifthey enrolled, they're aboard, and ifthey're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the rest ofus - win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists ... When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into dedicated glare ... The proper instruction attitude is '... We'd rather have you dead than incapable.'" (JCA-72). In "Critics ofScientology", Hubbard asserted "it is totally hopeless and fatal not to be a Scientologist." (JCA-73).

34. In a lecture, still sold as part ofa Scientology course, Hubbard said "But what kind ofa government and what kind ofa weapon is really serious? Not a weapon that destroys mud. A weapon that destroys minds, that's serious. Out ofthe body ofknowledge which lies before you [i.e.,

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanlj/general.html 22/08/2003 Scientology] a sufficient technology is [sic exists?] to take over, seize and handle any government on the face ofthe Earth ... You can control men like you would control robots with those techniques ... Contained in the knowable, workable portions before your eyes there are methods of controlling human beings and thetans [spirits] which have never before been dreamed ofin this universe. Control mechanisms ofsuch awesome and solid proportions that ifthe remedies were not so much easier to apply, one would be appalled at the dangerousness to beingness [sic] that exists in Scientology ... This universe has long been looking for new ways to make slaves. Well, we've got some new ways to make slaves here." (JCA-74). In private papers revealed to a California court in 1984, Hubbard said "Men are my (JCA-75). The hypnotic nature of Scientology

35. An analysis ofHubbard's early publications on Dianetics makes it clear that he had practised hypnosis since his teens. He claimed vast experience as a hypnotist. Dianetics was a fusion of Freudian technique and "light trance" hypnosis. Hubbard also made it clear that aspects ofhis original Dianetic technique are hypnotic. Although these practices were briefly suspended in the 1950s, they have been backin full use for more than a decade in all ofScientology's many

I organizations. For example, in a 1950 lecture, Hubbard withdrew the system ofcounting people into a state of"reverie" prior to a Dianetic session, "Sometimes people go into a hypnotic trance by accident with this count system" (JCA-76). In his 1951 book Science ofSurvival Hubbard said "When an auditor finds his pre-clear unusually suggestive [sic], he should be very careful what he says to the pre-clear. He may notice that a pre-clear after he closes his eyes will begin to flutter his eyelids. This is a symptom ofthe very lightest level ofhypnotic trance." (JCA-77) However, in the current "Book One" Dianetic procedure, the auditor is to "Count slowly and soothingly from 1 to 7" until "the preclear's eyes close and you notice his eyelids flicker" (JCA-78).

36. Hubbard said that Dianetics can be used to "play on another individual like a good organist plays on a Wurlitzer ... Knowing by observation, the push buttons ofanother person or, as in Political Dianetics, a society the organist can play whatever piece he likes at will." (JCA-79)

37. Recipients ofDianetic "processing" will tend to invent "memories" (for example, believing that they are reliving birth and conception or "past lives" in extra-terrestrial societiesj.so causing False Memory Syndrome. The techniques ofScientology exploit this collapse ofdistinction between memory and imagination to induce euphoria and dependency. In "Training Routine Zero", a fundamental practice ofScientology, individuals are expected to spend "some hours" sitting immobile and staring at another similarly immobile Scientologist (JCA-80). This leads to a hypnotic state in which theScientologist hallucinates and experiences spatial distortion. In-the Scientology "process" "Opening Procedure by Duplication", the Scientology "auditor" commands the recipient to walk between two tables, picking up the book on one and the bottle on the other and guessing their weight and temperature. This procedure is received in two hour sessions, and as many as 18 sessions can be administered over a few days. The procedure leads to spatial dissociation, which the Scientologist is told indicates that he has left his human body although all ofhis perceptions are still channelled through it (JCA-8I). The Sea Organization

38. The Sea Organization, or Sea Org, was created by Hubbard in August 1967. According to promotional literature, "The Sea Org is the only guarantee ofthe survival ofScientology technology on this planet. Without the survival ofScientology technology, there is no hope for the survival of Man;" (JCA-82).

39. Speaking ofSea Org members, Hubbard said "the whole value ofa being is to his group and not

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanlj/general.html 22/08/2003 vu •• to himselfat all..." (lCA-83).

40. Hubbard asserted that the Sea Org is "fabian", and redefined that word to mean "using stratagem' delay to wear out opponent" (JCA-84). Hubbard wanted the Sea Org to be seen as "a determined but elusive sometimes frightening group", He also asserted that the Sea Org has "tough discipline", that "Only those members who are not used heavily aboard [ship] or on mission seem to go slack." (lCA-8S).

41. The Sea Org is a paramilitary organization, in which members wear pseudo-navaluniform hold pseudo-naval ranks (JCA-86). Members also wear the equivalent ofcampaign ribbons (JCA 87). Scientology teaches reincarnation, and Sea Org members sign a contract for a billion years (JCA-88). Elsewhere this is styled "a pledge ofeternal service". This text adds: "New Sea Org members undergo rigorous basic training ... Sea Org members, having devoted their lives to their religion, work long hours for little pay and live a communal existence" (JCA-89). The recruit gives away certain rights by signing the Sea Org contract: "I ... fully and without reservation, subscribe to the discipline, mores and conditions ofthis group and pledge to abide by them" (JCA-88). The Sea Org member is also expected to abide by the "Code ofa Sea Org Member": "1. I promise to uphold, forward and carry out Command Intention ... 5. I promise to uphold the fact that duty is the Sea Org Member's true motivation, which is the highest motivation there is ... 1 I promise to accept and fulfill to the utmost of ability the responsibilities entrusted to me whatever they may be wherever they may carry in the line of duty ... 17. I promise through my actions to increase the power ofthe Sea Org and decrease the power ofany enemy." "Ethics"

42. In the mid-1960s, Hubbard began to experiment on his followers with.t'ethics penalties" - the use ofhumiliating and degrading practices to enforce unthinking compliance with his orders. In the "Policy Letter", "Awards and Penalties", Hubbard outlined "penalties" that staffmembers must suffer, prefacing his comments with this statement "Does not apply to Sea Org which has its own, much worse." Under "Non-existence", Hubbard wrote: "Must wear old clothes. Maynot bathe. Women must not wear make-up or have hair-do's. Men may not shave. No lunch hour is given such persons are expected not-to-leave thepremises."(JCA-91). In the "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Hubbard ordered that staffinacertain "ethics condition" should be subjected to "day night confinement to org premises." (JCA-92). This was reiteratedin a subsequent "Policy Letter" (JCA-93). Speaking ofhis "ethicspenalties", Hubbard asserted "one ex-Naval.person, reading them realized suddenly, 'you could kill a man with the penalties ofnon-existence, by work and no sleep." (JCA-94):

43. In 1968, Hubbard introduced the practice of"overboarding". A photograph ofthis practice was published in Scientology's magazine "The AUditor", issue 41, with the caption: "Students are thrown overboard gross out tech and bequeathed to the deep!" (JCA-95). Overboarding was used as a punishment for failure to comply exactly with Hubbard's orders. At about the same.time, the tank punishment where individuals were put into the bilge tanks and kept awake for 84 hours - and the chainlocker punishment - where individuals were put in the dark, cramped, waterlogged, rat-infested and filthy chainlocker. Witnesses have said that even children were put chainlocker at Hubbard's order. The Rehabilitation Project Force

44. In 1973: Hubbard introduced the "Rehabilitation Project Force" ("RPF") (JCA-96). Disobedient

http://horne.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 General report on Sctentotogy oy JUll

Sea Org members have been assigned to the RPF from that time. The RPF replaced the "Rehabilitation Unit" (JCA-96) ofwhich Hubbard said "The unit is worked hard during the day on a rigorous ..". This unit had replaced the "Mud Box Brigade" - "persons appointed to clean mud boxes, fuel lines, water lines, bilges, etc." (JCA-97). Few ofthe internal memoranda which apply to the RPF are publicly available. All are.relevant to litigation, as they show the true character ofScientology and the inhuman pressures brought to bear upon Sea Org members. The designations for RPF material are "Executive Directive 965 Flag 'RPF Reinstated'" and all additions and "Flag Order 3434" and all additions (there areat least 56 memoranda in this series, numbered FO 3434-1 to FO 3434-56).

45. The RPF is virtually a labour and thought reform camp. Members are forbidden communication with any but their "bosun" (the head ofthe RPF); they have to comply immediately with any order; they even shorter hours than other staff; they eat even poorer food than other staff(often rice, beans porridge for weeks. For some time in Florida, "RPFers" were fed left-over food) (JCA 98); they sleep in "pig's berthing", i.e. without beds (JCA-99,JCA-IOO); they do hard labour and menial tasks, including toilet sewer cleaning; they are rarely permitted time off; they receive one quarter ofthe already derisory pay ofother staff(JCA-I 0I); and they have to write down detailed "confessions", which may be published by the organization (JCA-I02, JCA-I03). Finally, an RPF sentence is open-ended and may last for as much·as four years. Failure to comply leads to posting to the "RPFers RPF", which according to witnesses has consisted offalse imprisonment, False imprisonment or "isolation" is a part ofthe "technology" ofScientology (JCA-I04, lCA-I05). There are hundreds offormer members who suffered the RPF . Isolation watches

46 While aboard ship during the early 1970s, Hubbard introduced "isolation watches" where an individual is forcibly confined after a "psychotic break" (a mental breakdown, usually caused by Scientology's procedures). Such people can be held for weeks under 24-hour guard (JCA 104, lCA-I05). The procedure is referred to as "babywatching" or "babysitting" in Scientology. In 1994, The Independent newspaper in Britain published an accountofl'babywatching" (leA-I06). HCO Ethics 2543 of28 September 1993, concerning Heidi D., makes it clear that the practice is still in use (lCA-IOS). Indeed, the practice forms a part ofScientology's incontrovertible "scripture" (JCA-I04). ' . The Erosion of Critical Thinking

47. I have spent over ten years interviewing and counselling former Scientologists, and have come to the firm conclusion that Dianetics and Scientology tend toerode independent decision making and critical thinking. Hubbard claimed that his techniques were the only valid approach to mental and spiritual well-being. He derided all psychotherapeutic practices (lCA-I 07). Hubbard asserted with regard to psychology psychiatry that "the instigators, patrons and supporters ofthese two subjects classify fully and demonstrably as criminals." (lCA-I08). Although Scientology claims to be "open to people ofall religions" (lCA-I09), Hubbard asserted that heaven has deserted for at least 43 trillion years (JCA-IIO), and that Christ is simply a fabrication (JCA-III).

48. The techniques ofDianetics and Scientology induce uncritical euphoria and heighten suggestibility. Scientologists are forbidden criticism ofHubbard, his organizations, his techniques, and ofother Scientologists except in written reports to those organizations (JCA-II2, JCA-113). Such "ethics reports" are encouraged. To even attempt to discuss the processing techniques is termed "verbal tech[nology]" and forbidden (lCA-I14). Offenders are subjected to a "Committee of Evidence", a Scientology tribunal, for the commission ofa "Suppressive Act" or "High Crime". Such

htttr/zhome.snafu .de/tilmanljlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 Generai report on ociemoiogy lJy JVU

"High Crimes" are considered the equivalent ofmurder (lCA-115).

49. During the first stages ofinvolvement, a new recruit is often flattered as an exceptional individual and encouraged by false claims ofphysical cure (e.g., JCA-21, JCA-23 to JCA 30) and psychic abilities (e.g., JCA-69, JCA-70)made in Hubbard's works and by euphoric Scientologists.

50. Scientologists are bombarded with promotional1iterature, magazines such as Impact, Source, Advance!,The Auditor, Communication, Certainty, Freedom, Freewinds, Good News, Inroads, Celebrity, International Scientology News and Keeping Scientology Working News. These all point to the supposedly positive and beneficial effects ofDianetics and Scientology, but avoid anymention ofcourt decisions, medical reports, government enquiries pieces ofthese practices.

51. In its publications, Scientology incites hatred for anyone critical ofits ideas and techniques. For example, in "Ron's JoumaI34", which has frequently been reprinted, Hubbard said: "Time and again since 1950, the vested interests'which pretend to run the world (for their own appetites and profit) have mounted full-scale attacks. With a running dog press and slavish government agencies the forces ofevil have launched their lies and sought, by whatever means, to check and destroy Scientology. What is being decided in this arena is whether mankind has a chance to go free or be smashed and tortured as an abject subject ofthe power elite ... a review ofthese battles over the past thirty-two years moves one to contemptuous laughter. The enemy, perched in their trees or swinging by their tails, have been about as effective as one oftheir psychologist's monkeys peeling a policeman's club thinking it is a banana and then throwing it only to hit the chiefape in the face ... The AMA, pouring lies into the press through gnashing teeth persevered for years - and then went .bankrupt. The psychiatrist, riding high in 1959, hoping to place one ofhis ilk in a blackmail position behind every head ofstate, hoping to consign any citizen at his to Siberia, trying to preserve his right to kill and maim as a profession above the law, is today butt ofcomic strips. And what ofthe FDA that, for fifteen years snarled and snapped at the E-Meter? One hardly hears of them today. And what ofthe mighty Interpol, that tool ofthe CIA? It was found to be a nest ofwar criminals hiding out from the law itself.. You do not hear much about this from the running dog press because, ofcourse, they were the tool ofthe enemy in the first place. They lose because they traffic in lies ... They are mad monkeys ... just remember a maxim: ifthe papers say it, it isn't true." (JCA·116).

52. Scientologists are discouraged from reading anything hostile to Scientology ("entheta") (JCA 117), and ordered not to communicate in any way with anyone critical ofits teachings (JCA-2). This is quite obviously a form ofmental imprisonment or psychological slavery.·

53. Scientology advertising is based upon the principles ofmotivational research, and seeks to recruit people by bypassing their reasoning. This policy was clearly stated by Hubbard (lCA-54). In 1988, the Church ofScientology hired leading Public Relations firm Hill and Knowlton to make its advertising more effective (JCA-118). Processing

54. Hubbard termed the hypnotic counselling procedures ofDianetics and Scientology "auditing" or "processing". Scientologists undertake some 27 "levels" consisting ofhundreds ofdifferent processing procedures. Scientology practitioners are rarely, ifever, trained in psychology or psychotherapy.

55. Most processing is done with the subject, or "preclear", connected to a psychogalvanometer, described by Hubbard as a "'lie detector' as used by police and in psychology laboratories" (JCA 119). The subject is connected to the galvanometer by two hand held soup cans, which function as

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jIgeneral.html 22/08/2003 electrodes. Thegalvanometer measures variations in a small electric current passed through the subject. Where an individual is unwilling to be interrogated on the E-meter, the following practice forms a part ofthe "scriptures" ofScientology:"When the subject placed on a meter will not talk but can be made to hold the cans (or can be held while the cans are strapped to the soles or placed under the armpit, I am sorry ifthat sounds brutal, it isn't [sic]), it is still possible to obtain full information from the subject." (JCA-120).

56. During the course ofauditing the individual is frequently asked to disclose guilty secrets or "withholds". The auditor writes these-confessions down. According to Bulletin "Miscellaneous Reports": "When an Auditor finds an Ethics Situation [in session reports] he should mark it and circle it in red after the session. The pc [preclear subject] is not necessarily in ... but the Auditor should make mention ofit ... Ifit is a serious situation that affects others, then it is the Auditor's responsibility to report it." (JCA-I21). A copy ofthe report is sent to a Scientology Ethics department.

57. Scientologists are periodically subjected to confessional interrogations, where printed lists, sometimes numbering hundreds ofquestions, are asked (lCA-122) Scientologists pay 200 pounds per hour for these "confessionals" (JCA-32). Confessional lists are checked with the subject connected to the "E-meter" (JCA-I03). Such interrogations are now generally styled "confessionals", "integrity processing" and "eligibility confessionals" but were originally styled "security checks" or "sec checks": "In the early '60s LRH [Hubbard] developed the technology known as Sec Checking. As issued was used for two purposes: as a general tool to clean up a pc's overts and withholds and as a security tool to detect out-ethics personsand security risks." (JCA-123). In "The Only Valid Security Check", details are requested potential past misdeeds, including: shoplifting, theft, forgery, blackmail, smuggling, drunkenness, burglary, embezzlement, cannibalism, drug addiction, sexual practices counterfeiting. There are also 21 questions relating to Hubbard, his wife and Scientology (lCA-I22). A Scientology "Bulletin" says "The specific details ofeach misdeed must be gotten."

58. In the "Hubbard Communications ManualofJustice", Hubbard said "Intelligence is mostly the collection ofdata on people ... It is basically a listening and filing action. It is done all the time about everything and everybody." (JCA-I25). Hubbard also said "The main danger ofIntegrity Processing is not probing a person's past but failing to do so thoroughly. When you leave an Integrity Processing question 'live' and go on to the next one, you set up a nasty situation" (JCA-I26); "Take up each reading question [i.e., each question which causes a reaction on the 'Esmeter'[, getting the what, when, where, all of overt [transgression] ... Get specifics ... For security investigation purposes, get all the exact names, dates, addresses, phone numbers, and any other information that might be helpfuL."

59. Scientologists can also be subjected to "HCO Confessionals", where they are told that the ' information they give will not remain confidential: "The second use ofIntegrity Processing is as an ethics or security measure ... [it] can be done as a straight security action." (JCA-I23). The same sets ofquestions are used in both forms ofconfessional: "The term 'I am not auditing you' only occurs when 'a Confessional is done for justice reasons. Otherwise the procedure is thesaine (By 'justice reasons' is meant when a person is refusing to come clean [sic]...) ... A Confessional done for justice reasons is not auditing and the data uncovered is not withheld from the proper authorities." (JCA 103).

60. In Church ofScientology California v. Arrnstrong, Mary Sue Hubbard, former "Controller" of Scientology, admitted that she had issued Guardian's Order 161269 which orders that "processing files" - the written records ofconfessionals are to be reviewed so that discreditable material in them can be used against former members (JCA-127). This despite many representations that such

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 confessional files are confidential. In July 1977, the FBI seized many examples ofsuch "folder culls". Former senior Scientology executives testified in the Armstrong case that folder culling was a common practice in Scientology (Laurel 'Sullivan, Nancy Dincalci, Kima Douglas - all ofwhom had worked with Hubbard, and Edward WaIters, a former Guardian's Office intelligence operative) (JCA-128, JCA-129, JCA-l30, JCA-I3l).

61. Any critisicm ofHubbard or Scientology is attributed to the critic's guilt and fear ofbeing found out. Hubbard asserted: "Now, get this as a technical fact, not just a hopeful idea. Every time we have investigatedthe background ofa ofScientology, we have found crimes for which that person or group could be imprisoned under existing law. We do not find critics ofScientology who do not have criminal pasts. Over and over we prove this." (JCA-73).

62. Should a Scientology student question any ofthe tenets ofScientology, he is required to look up definitions ofwords in the text: "The student says he does not understand something. The Supervisor has him look earlier in the text for a misunderstood word." (JCA-132); "Whenever a person has a confused idea ofsomething or believes there is some conflict ofideas IT IS ALWAYS TRUE THAT A MISUNDERSTOOD WORD EXISTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT CONFUSION." (Emphasis in original, JCA-133). No-one who disagrees with Hubbardcancontinue in Scientology. All practices have to be adhered T is regarded as a violation of"standard technology". In this way, even factual errors in Hubbard's work remain unchanged. For example, the phrase "The 14th century psychiatrist" used in the "Policy Letter" "Sanity" (JCA-134). A "course supervisor" at the Birmingham Scientology organization spent almost 30 minutes trying to persuade me that this not a typographical error for "19th".

63. Hubbard's "Policy Letter" "Suppressive Acts...", (lCA-115), lists over 100 actions considered "High Crimes" or "Suppressive Acts" by Scientology. The list begins with "murder", making it clear how severely Scientology views the other listed actions. These include: "Public statements against Scientology"; "Testifying hostilely before state or publicinquiries"; "Continued membership in a divergent group"; "Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a suppressive person or group"; "Delivering up the person ofa Scientologist without justifiable defense or lawful protest to the demands ofcivil or criminal law"; "Permitting students to talk to each other ... during course hours"; "to publicly depart Scientology". For committing any ofthese "high crimes", a Scientologist can be expelled and "declared Suppressive" and his Scientologist friends and family forbidden further communication with him (JCA-2).

64. In training, Scientologists are subjected to an elaborate system of"checkouts" to ensure that they have exactly "duplicated" Hubbard's teachings. These include "high crime checkouts" (JCA-135). The purpose ofsuch "checkouts" is to bring about absolute agreement with Hubbard. Should a student fail to agree with Hubbard, he will be sent first to the "Cramming" section ofthe organization and then, ifthat fails, to the "Ethics" section. No student is permitted to continue with a course beyond a disagreement, and students who disagree are separated from other students. Continued disagreement leads to expulsion from Scientology.

65. RCO Policy Letter "Policies on Physical Healing..." explains categories ofpeople forbidden involvement with Scientology: "a. Persons intimately connected with persons ... ofknown antagonism to ... Scientology"; "Persons who 'want to be processed to see ifScientology works' ... News reporters fall into this category."; "Persons who 'have an open mind'" (JCA-136).

66. Scientologists are forbidden medical assistance without consent from Scientology (JCA-l37). All psychotherapies and meditational practices are forbidden (JCA-138).

67. Any Scientology "Clear" can be questioned to determine which ofHubbard's claimed criteria they have obtained - for example, freedom from the common cold, a near perfect memory and the ability to do a calculation in ten or fifteen seconds that would take a "normal" person 30 minutes.

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanlj/general.html 22/08/2003 The claims for "Operating Thetan levels", which come after "Clear", are stranger yet. Scientology "Operating Thetans" should be asked about their ability to leave their bodies and remotely perceive events. Demonstration should be sought. Having failed to meet Hubbard's criteria, the individual will still show absolute loyalty to Hubbard. Retribution against litigants, critics, competitors and former members . . 68. The Hubbard "Policy Letter" "Suppressive Acts, Suppression ofScientology and Scientologists" (JCA-115), shows how easy it is to commit "High Crimes" or "Suppressive Acts". These include "Public disavowal Scientology", "Public statements against Scientology", "Bringing civil suit against any Scientology organization", "Demanding the return ofany or all fees", "Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a suppressive person or group", "publicly departing Scientology" and "Violation or neglect of any ofthe ten points ofKeeping Scientology Working" (in particular "Knowing it (Scientology "technology"] is correct","Applying the technology", "Hammering out ofexistence incorrect technology"). Strictly speaking, anyone who does not know that Scientology's "technology" is correct is deemed a "Suppressive Person".

69. It is made clear in Scientology's published policy that a person expelled from Scientology is (JCA-139). A "Suppressive Person declare" is Scientology's equivalent ofthe Shia Muslim "farwa'',

In "Justice, Suppressive Acts, Suppression ofScientology and Scientologists, the Fair-Game Law", Hubbardasserted "By FAIR GAME is meant.without rights for self, possessions or position, I and no Scientologist may be before a Committee ofEvidence or punished for any action taken against a Suppressive Person or Group during the period that person or group is 'fair Igame'." (JCA-140) In this Policy Letter, learn that "Suppressive Acts include ... 1st degree arson, disintegration ofpersons or belongings not guilty ofsuppressive acts". Scientologists 'are thereby given leave to destroy the person and property ofa "Suppressive Person".

71. Elsewhere, Hubbard carefully explained the provisions ofFair Game: A Suppressive Person "May be deprived ofproperty or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." (JCA-141).

72. In 1968, Hubbard ordered that the words "Fair Game" "may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations." However, practice ofFair Game was not cancelled "This .. does not cancelany policy on the treatment or handling ofan SP [Suppressive Person]." (JCA-142).

73. A training checksheet used as evidence in the conviction ofeleven Scientology officials in the US (including Hubbard's wife and immediate deputy), shows that the 1 March 1965 "Policy Letter" (JCA-140) still formed part ofa secret course for Scientology harassment operatives (members of"Branch One" ofthe "Guardian's Office" ofScientology) (JCA-143, p.18, second item).

74. When the nominal head ofScientology's "Guardian's Office", Jane Kember, the head of Scientology Intelligence, Morris Budlong, were sentenced to imprisonment in the United States, in 1980, the sentencing memorandum included this statement: "Defendants, through one oftheir attorneys, have stated that the fair game policy continued in effect well after the indictment in this case and the conviction ofthe first nine eo-defendants, Defendants claim that the policy was abrogated by the Church's Board ofDirectors in late July or early August, 1980." (JCA-144, footnote p.16).

75. The "Policy Letter" which allegedly cancelled "fairgame" in 1980 (JCA-139), was itself

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanljlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 cancelled by a Policy Letter of8 September 1983 (JCA-145). such, Fair Game is an incontrovertible "scripture" ofthe Churches ofScientology (JCA·46, JCA-47, JCA-48), even though the words "fair game" no longer used to describe the practice (JCA-142).

76. Mr. Justice Latey ruled in the High Court in London, in July 1984, that "Deprival ofproperty, injury by means, trickery, suing, lying or destruction have been pursued throughout and to this day with the fullest possible vigour ... The 'Church' resorts to lies and deceit whenever it thinks it will profit it to do so." (JCA-146).

77.In Wollersheimv. Church ofScientology ofCalifornia (the "mother church" ofthe Churches of Scientology at the time the suit was filed), the California Appeal Court ruled, in a decision upheld by the US Supreme Court: "Wollersheim was compelled to abandon his wife and his family through the policy ofdisconnect. When his mental illness reached such a level he actively planned his suicide, was forbidden to seek professional help. Finally, when Wollersheim was able to leave the Church, it subjected him to financial ruin through its policy of'fair game'." (JCA-147, pp.A:·7,15 & At appeal, Scientology asserted that "fair game".was a "core practice ofScientology", and therefore protected as "religious expression". This position was also made on behalfofScientology in the case against Gera1d Armstrong, in 1984, by religious expert Dr. Frank Flinn

78. In the same case (Church ofScientologyofCalifornia v. Annstrong) (JCA-7), Judge Paul Breckenridge criticised the continued use ofFair Game, showing that the policy had remained in force beyond the supposed cancellation in 1980. Judge Breckenridge said: "In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the [Scientology] organization over the years with its 'Fair Game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as its enemies." Judge Breckenridge added, "After the within suit was filed '" Defendant Armstrong was the subject ofharassment, including being followed and surveilled by individuals who admitted employment byPlaintiff; being assaulted by one ofthese individuals; being struck bodily by a car driven by one ofthese individuals; having two attempts made by said individuals apparently to involve Defendant Armstrong in a freeway automobile accident; having said individuals come onto Defendant Armstrong'sproperty, spy in his windows, create disturbances, upset his neighbors".

79. Fair Game has long been a policy ofScientology. In 1955 Hubbard wrote, speaking of practitioners ofScientology not licensed by him: "The law can be used very easily to harass '" if possible, ofcourse, ruin him utterly" (JCA-27, p.157). Hubbard also wrote, "Ifattacked on some vulnerable point by anyone anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace." (lCA-148).

80. In 1965, Hubbard wrote in Scientology's "Auditor" magazine: "Principals ofthe Victorian government such as the 'Prime Minister', Anderson the 'Q.C.' and hostile members ofthe 'Victorian Parliament' are continued as suppressive persons and they and their families and connections may not be processed or trained and are fair game." (JCA-I49).

81. Current Scientology "scriptures" attribute only negative qualities to "Suppressive Persons" (JCA ISO). Between 1983 and 1992, the number ofpeople ajudged "Suppressive Persons" by Scientology increased from 600 (JCA-I) to 2,400 (lCA-lSt). According to Scientology leader David Miscavige, the section ofHubbard's supposed psychotherapy Operating Thetan Course Section 9 - will not be released until "ethics is fully gotten in on the SPs [Suppressive Persons]" (JCA-I52). This means that all critics ofScientology must be silenced. In light ofthe "scripture" of"Fair Game", the interpretation ofthis order to all Scientologists can only be alarming.

82. The lengths to which Scientologists will go to harass opponents are shownby a Hubbard lecture, still distributed within Scientology, where Hubbard boasted ofthecreation ofhis intelligence agency the "Guardian's Office", and its infiltration ofnewspapers, international banks and even the British government: "With all ofthis action being taken against us in the last 17 years ... it was vitally

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 -&-& .... ------_ necessary that I isolate who it was on this planet who was attacking us ... The Organization, under the direction ofMary Sue (Hubbard], ... employed several professional intelligence agents who had long and successful professional backgrounds and they looked into this matter for us and the results oftheir activities although still in progress have told us all we needed to know with regard to any enemy we had on this planet. Our enemies on this planet are less than 12 men. They are members of the Bank ofEngland, and other higher financial circles. They own and control newspaper chains and they are oddly enough directors in all the Mental Health groups in the world ... Wilson ... the current premier ofEngland [sic] is totally involved with these fellows ... They have collected rather interesting files on us ... and their orders concerning what to do about this as part oftheir files all makes very interesting reading. We ofcourse have full copies oftheir files. It was, ofcourse, their bad luck to tangle with someone who had been trained in the field ofintelligence by the allied governments, which is myselfand they had insufficient security and insufficient loyalty amongst their own people to keep out the intelligence agents which we sent against them." (lCA-153).

83. Ten years after Hubbard initiated the practice ofinfiltration andtheft, Churches ofScientology in the US were raided. This led to the conviction and imprisonment ofeleven Scientology officials (JCA-154). Almost forty others were cited as "unindicted eo-conspirators", including Hubbard (JCA 155). Similar events led to convictions in Canada in 1992.

84. The sentencing memorandum in USA v. Mary Sue Hubbard et al makes clear the scale ofthe offences committed by Hubbard's agents: "The United States initiated the investigation resulted in-the instant indictment in view ofthe brazen, systematic and persistent burglaries of United States Government offices in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles, California, over an extended period ofat least some two years. Additionally, the United States was confronted with the pervasive conduct ofthe defendants in this case in thwarting a federal Grand Jury investigation by harboring a fugitive, in effect forcefully kidnapping a witness who had decided to surrender to the federal authorities, submitting false evidence to the Grand Jury, destroying other evidence which might have been ofvaluable aid to its investigation, preparing a cover-up story, and encouraging and drilling a witness to give false testimony under oath to that Grand Jury ... a review ofthe documentsseized in the ... searches ... show the incredible and sweeping nature ofthe criminal conduct ofthe defendants and ofthe organization which theyled. These crimes include infiltration and theft ofdocuments from a number ofprominent private national and world organizations, law firms and newspapers; the execution ofsmear campaigns and baseless law suits to destroy private individuals who had attempted to exercise their First Amendment rights to freedom ofexpression; the framing ofprivate citizens who had been critical ofScientology, including the forging of documents which led to the indictment ofat least one innocent person; violation ofthe civil rights of prominent private figures and public officials. These are but a few ofthe criminal acts not covered in the 'uncontested' stipulation ofevidence ... defendant Heldt's assertion that policy ofthe Church prohibits any illegality on the part ofits members or staff...' is totally unfounded and incorrect. The evidence in this case ... establish[es] beyond peradventure that the Church and its leadership had, over the years, approved, condoned and engaged in gross and widespread illegality. One, indeed, wonders how it can even be suggested that the defendants and their organization did not make illegal activities part and parcel oftheir daily work." (JCA-154). Scientology's attitude towards the Courts

85. The scriptures ofScientology show little respect for the judicial system. In 1965, Hubbard wrote "Don't react to Scientology Ethics as though it were 'wog' law. In society's 'courts' one is given the works and truth has little bearing on the findings. A mean judge or clever attorney and small legal errors decide a lot oftheir cases. Wog courts are like throwing dice. There is huge cost and publicity and punishment galore even for the innocent." (JCA-156). In another 1965 "Policy Letter", Hubbard said "Want to know why wog courts make people nervy? Who can predict a wog court decision? Who can even predictthe sentence man to man for the same crime?" (JCA-I5?).

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 -_.... -

86. The second edition ofWhat is Scientology? contains a section comparing "Scientology justice" to "wog law", which says that the "justicesystem is bogged down in a morass ofLatinized grammatical complexities and has become, sadly, a matter ofwhichattorney can present the better Right and wrong, guilt and innocence are relegated to bit players in the show. Alawyer defending a criminal on trial for armedrobbery, for instance, is not interested in establishing guilt or innocence; he is looking for a loophole technicality on which the case be dismissed and his client set free whether guilty or not. Few have the wealth necessary or even try to pursue justice through the courts and even ifone prevails, attorney costs often make it a Pyrrhic victory. The due of court system is in a virtual gridlock ofmotions, countermotions, depositions, injunctions, appeals, claims and counterclaims." (JCA-158).

87. In a statement recusing himselffrom a Scientology case, Californiajudge James Ideman said "The past eight years have consisted mainly ofa prolonged, and ultimately unsucessful, attempt to persuade or compel the plaintiffto comply with lawful discovery. These efforts have been fiercely resisted by plaintiffs. They have utilized every device that we on the District Court have ever heard ofto avoid such compliance, and some that are new to us. This noncompliance has consisted of evasions, misrepresentations, broken promises and lies, but ultimately with refusal. As part ofthis scheme to not comply, the plaintiffs have undertaken a massive campaign offiling every conceivable motion (and some inconceivable) to disguise the true issue in these pretrial proceedings. Apparently viewing litigation as war, plaintiffs by this tactic have had the effect ofmassively increasing the to the other parties, and, for a while, to the Court ... The scope ofthe plaintiffs':efforts have to be seen to be believed ... 1,737 filings [were made by Scientology] '" Yet it is almost all puffery motions without merit or (JCA-159).

88. In the "scriptures" ofScientology, Hubbard wrote": "the law can be used very easily to harass." The December 1980 issue of"The American Lawyer" makes it clear thatthis policy has extended to judges in trials involving Scientology (JCA-160).

89. As part oftheir membership contract, Scientologists are compelled to sign the "Pledge to Mankind", first issued in 1984, ·which reads in part "In the United States ... we are the targets of unprincipledattacks the court system by those who wouldline their pockets from our hard won coffers. Bigots in all branches ofgovernment ... are bent on our destruction through taxation and" repressive legislation. We have been subjected to illegal heresy trials in two countries before prejudiced and malinformed judges who are not qualified or inclined to perceive the truth." (JCA- 161). .

90. 1985 issue ofthe Scientology magazine "Impact" carries the following account "Rev. Ken Hoden ... President ofthe ChurchofScientology ofCalifornia recently won a motion in Los Angeles that allowed the Church to rebringan important Federal Lawsuit. Afterone ofthe Churchattomeys was arrested on the charge ofcontempt ofcourt and another escorted out ofthe Courtrooms by order ofa suppressive Judge .., Rev. Hoden got up. Re argued before the judge for a full twenty minutes. He had effectively picked up the ball and gave a most moving, pro-Church and anti-suppression speech, right to the ofthe suppression: the judge in the case." (JCA-162). Counselling

91. Since 1983,1 have counselled tens offormer Scientologists and been appalled by a succession of accounts offinancial and psychological devastation. I have met individuals who borrowed money under false pretences, bankrupted businesses to pay immense amounts for Scientology "auditing", and abandoned spouses and even small children to pursue Scientology. 1 have also counselled individuals who had left Scientology as much as 20 years before and who had been plagued by guilt and a sense ofinadequacy induced by Scientology and its techniques ofpsychological domination. Scientology is especially dangerous to those with incipient mental illness. I have counselled two

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 individuals who were first committed to mental hospitals after encountering Scientology and been consulted by the staffofa psychiatric hospital in a third case..A California Appeal Court judgment, upheld by the US Supreme Court, shows that Scientology brought about manic depression and suicidal tendencies in former member Lawrence Wollersheim OCA-147, p.A-2).

92. The promises ofDianetics and Scientology are so attractive, the counselling procedures so invasive and the selling techniques so forceful that former members can take years to see them simply techniques ofpsychological domination. U.S. academics Conway and Siegelman, who studied 400 former cult members from 48 groups, concluded that Scientology has "the most debilitating set ofrituals ofany cult in America .,. although claiming the most severe long-term effects, former Scientologists surveyed reported the lowest total ofhours per week spent in ritual and indoctrination." Conway and Siegelman approximated the time for unaided recovery at 12.5 years (JCA-163). My own experiences as a counsellor bear this out.

Jonathan Caven-Atack General Report on Scientology - exhibits list: lCA-l. Sea Organization Executive Directive 2192 International, "List ofDeclared Suppressive Persons", 27 January 1983.

JCA-2. Scientology Policy Directive 28, "Suppressive Act Dealing with a Suppressive Person", 13 August 1982. lCA-3. Sea Organization Executive Directive 2104, "The Flow Up the Bridge...", 7 November 1982, p.7.

JCA-4. AOSHUK price list, 1983.

JCA-5. Professor Stephen A. Kent, "International Social Control by the Church ofScientology.", 23 March 1992.

JCA-6. Professor Louis Jolyon West, M.D., "Psychiatry and Scientology", 6 May 1992.

JCA-7. Memorandum oOntended Decision in Church ofScientology ofCalifornia v. Gerald Armstrong, Superior Court for the State ofCalifornia, C420153, 20 June 1984. e- JCA-8. Church ofScientology International, What is Scientology?, second edition, 1992.

JCA-9. Church ofScientology, "A Report to Members ofParliament on Scientology, December 1968.

JCA-I0. US Navy medical records for L. Ron Hubbard. lCA-l1. Look magazine, 5 December 1950. lCA-12. Letter from the Department ofthe Navy to Mark Jones, I October 1985.

JCA-B. Hubbard, "Man who invented Scientology", Bulletin of26 May 1959, reprinted in The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 4, pp.470-471, 1979 printing.

JCA-14. Letter from the registrar, George Washington University to the US Navy, 27 May 1941, including Hubbard's college grades.

JCA-15. Hubbard, Mission into Time, 1973. http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j1general.html 22/08/2003 -_ -.-- - - -

JCA-16. Hubbard, "A Short Biography ofL. Ron Hubbard", "The Auditor" issue 63.

JCA-I7. Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, What is Scientology?, 1978 edition.

JCA-18. Hubbard,journal ofhis 1927 trip to Guam (exhibit 62 in CSC v Annstrong, 1984).

JCA-19. Hubbard,journal ofhis 1928 trip to Guarn (exhibit 65 in CSC v Annstong).

Hubbard, Camp-Fire'l.J'Adventure' magazine, 1 Octoberl935.

JCA-21. Hubbard, Dianetics: The-Modem Science ofMental Health, New Era, Denmark, 1982 printing.

JCA-22. Freud, Two Short Accounts ofPsycho-Analysis, trans and ed James Strachey, Pelican Books, England, 1984.

JCA-23. Hubbard, Address by L, Ron Hubbard, Arcadia Theater, Wichita, Kansas", 6 February 1952,

JCA-24. Hubbard, Scientology: A History ofMan, 1968 printing.

JCA-25. Hubbard, "The Old Man's Case-Book", from "The Journal ofScientology", issue 15-G, May 1953, reprinted in The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 1, p.337, 1979 printing.

JCA-26."The AUditor", issue 198, worldwide, 1975.

JCA-27. Hubbard, "The Scientologist -A Manual on the Dissemination ofMaterial", reprinted in The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology volume 2,pp.151-171, 1979 printing.

JCA-28. "Advance!", issue 10, p.2.

JCA-29. "The Auditor'l.Africa and Europe, issue 231, p:3. lCA-30. "Celebrity", minor 247,p.14.

JCA-3!. Hubbard, Scientology 0-8, pp. 134-135 (removed from subsequenteditions), 1971 printing.

JCA-32. Advanced Organisation Saint Hill United Kingdom, "Donations Information", March 1992.

JCA-33 . Hubbard, "Philadelphia Doctorate Course", lecture 18, 1982 transcript, p.17.

JCA-34. Hubbard letter to Helen O'Brien, 10 April 1953 (exhibit 500-4V in CSC v Annstrong 1984, cited in vo1.12, p.1976 and vo1.26, p.4619).

JCA-35. Hubbard, Associate Letter of 10 March 1954, reprinted in The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, volume 2, pp.32-34, 1979 printing.

JCA-36. Hubbard, Modem Management Technology Defined, 1976 edition, definition of"Church of Ainerican Science".

JCA-37 , Roy Wallis, PhD, The Road to Total Freedom - a sociological analysis ofScientology, Heinmann, England, 1976, p.128.

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jlgenera1.html 22/08/2003 JCA-38. Hubbard, "Why Doctor ofDivinity?" in "Professional Auditor's Bulletin", issue 32, reprinted in The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 2, pp.72-75, 1979 edition.

JCA-39. Hubbard, "Religious Philosophy and Religious Practice", Bulletin of18 April 1967, reprinted in The Technical Volumes ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 6, p.195, 1979 edition.

JCA-40. Hubbard, "Six Basic Processes", Bulletin of4 May 1972, reprinted in The Technical Volumes ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 8, 1979 edition.

JCA-41. Hubbard, All About Bridge, LA, 1989 edition.

Church ofScientology International. What is Scientology?, p.688, second edition, 1992.

JCA-43. Hubbard, The Background and Ceremonies ofthe Church ofScientology ofCalifomia, World Wide, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, East Grinstead, 1973, pp.26-55.

JCA-44. Affirmation ofE.G.Parrinder, 25 November 1971.

JCA-45. Frank K. Flinn testimony in Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, 1984, voI.23, ppA032 4160.

JCA-46. "The Corporations ofScientology" , p.24, 1989.

JCA-47. Trademark License Agreement - SMIIMission, licence to use Religious Technology Center trademarks and service marks.

JCA-48. Scientology Policy Directive 19, "The Integrity ofSour 7 July 1982.

Vinay Agarwala, 29 January 1981, Sea Org Aides Order 549-1. - .

JCA-50. Regina v Registrar General, ex parte Segerda1,Queens Bench,London, November and Court ofAppeal, July 1970.

jCA-51. Church ofScientology International, "Field StaffMember Kit 1993.

JCA-52. Hubbard, "Registrar Drills", Policy Letter of27 May 1980, revised 2 October 1981.

JCA-53. HCOB FSM Breakthrough New FSM TRs - Controlling a Conversation, 27 January 1984, Field StaffMember Specialist, Bridge, LA, 1991.

JCA-54. Hubbard, "Second Lecture on Clearing Methodology", 13 May 1959.

JCA-55. Hubbard, Volunteer Minister's Handbook, 1977 printing.

JCA-56. Hubbard, "The Tone Scale", Scientology 0-8, p.101, 1971 printing.

JCA-57. Hubbard, "Lower Awareness Levels", Scientology 0-8, p.l33, 1971 printing.

JCA-58. Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary, 1975 edition.

JCA-59. Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary, p.335, 1975 edition.

JCA-60. Hubbard, Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary, 19?5 edition.

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 JCA-61. Hubbard, "Books are Dissemination", Bulletin of28 April 1960, reprinted in The Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 4, pp.78-81, 1979 printing.

JCA-62. The Standard Oxford Capacity Analysis.

JCA-63. The Hat ofthe Personality Test Evaluator.

JCA-64, Hubbard, "The Hard Sell Reference Pack", pp.i-vi, 1987.

JCA-65. Lee Lawrence, "To the Scientologist Loan Applicant", undated.

JCA-66. Hubbard, "The No-Interference Area Clarified and Re-enforced", undated.

JCA-67. Sea Organisation Executive Directive 2104 International, "The Flow Up the Bridge...", 7 November 1982, pp.17-18.

JCA-68. Hubbard, "Registrar Salesmanship Course Checksheet", Policy Letter of2 December 1972, revised 20 May 1980.

JCA-69. Hubbard, promotional leaflet, 1992, from Flag Mission Order 375, 1970.

JCA-70. Hubbard, "OT and Beyond", " The Auditor" issue 19, 1966.

JCA-71. Hubbard, "The Organization ofa PE Foundation", Bulletin of29 September reprinted in The TechnicalBulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, volume 3, pp.S27-528, 1979 printing.

JCA-72. Hubbard, "Keeping Scientology Working", Policy Letter of7 February 1965, reissued in 1980, The Organization Course, volume 0, pp.7-13, 1991 edition.

JCA-7J. Hubbard, "Critics ofScientology", Bulletin of5 November 1967, reprinted in The Organization Executive Course,volume 1, pp.782-784, 1991 edition.

JCA-74. Hubbard, "Philadelphia Doctorate Course", lecture 20, 1982 printing.

JCA-7S. Court transcript in Church ofScientology ofCalifornia v Armstrong, volume 13, p.2056 2057.

JCA-76. Hubbard, Introducing Dianetics, 1950, reprinted in The Research and Discovery Series, vo1.3, p.1S, Bridge, LA, 1st edition, 1982.

JCA-77. Hubbard, Science ofSurvival, Hubbard College ofScientology, East Grinstead, 1968, pp.227-228.

JCA-78. Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, Bridge, LA, 1988, p.54.

JCA-79. Hubbard, Educational Dianetics, 1950, reprinted in Research and Discovery Series, volume 3, p.241, Bridge, LA, 1st edition, 1982.

JCA-80. HCOB Training Drills Remodernized, 5 July 1978.

JCA-8I. HCOB Op Pro by Dup, 4 February 1959.

JCA-82. Promotional leaflet, "It's up to you", 1988 «,

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanlj/general.html 22/08/2003 JCA-83. Promotional leaflet, "What is the Sea Organization and what does it do?", dated "2/12/1979".

JCA-84. Hubbard, "Towards a Worthwhile Purpose", 1976.

JCA-85. Hubbard, "Functions ofthe Sea Org", 26 April 1968.

JCA-86. "New Sea Org Uniforms Enhance Ethics Presence", "High Winds", issue 7, 1987. . JCA-87. W.B.Robertson, "Service Insignia", Flag Order 2327R, 16 January 1974.

JCA-88. Church ofScientology International, Sea Organization "Contract ofEmployment", 1987.

JCA-89. Church ofScientology International, What is Scientology?, 1992 edition, p.360.

JCA-90. Hubbard, "The Code ofa Sea Org Member", 1978.

JCA-91. Hubbard, "Awards and Penalties", Policy Letter of26 September 1967.

JCA-92. Hubbard, "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Policy Letter of18 October 1967, issue iv, published in Scientology Basic StaffHat Book, number 1, p.26, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, East Grinstead, 1968.

JCA-93. Hubbard, "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Policy Letter of21 July 1968.

JCA-94. Hubbard, "Titles ofAddress", Flag Order 87,2 September 1967.

JCA-95. Hubbard, "The Auditor", issue 41.

JCA-96. Hubbard, Modem Management Technology Defined, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, 1976, defninitions of"Rehabilitation Project Force" and "rehabilitation unit",

as exhibit 96, defmition of"Mud Box Brigade".

c JCA-98. City ofClearwater Commission Hearings, Re: Church ofScientology, 7 May 1982, testimony ofDavid Ray, vol.3, pp.165-170.

JCA-99. Team Share System, Sea Org Executive Directive 3490 Int, 24 July 1986.

JCA-IOO. Clearwater Hearings, 7 May 1982, testimony ofCasey Kelly, vol.3, pp.51-53.

JCA-IOl. RPF Policy Checksheet, Flag Order 3434R-25RA, 25 July 1974.

JCA-I02. RPF Graduation Requirements Checklist, Flag Order 3434RC-56, 17 March 1980.

lCA-I03. Confessional Procedure, HCOB 30 November 1978, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol XII, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, 1980 edition.

lCA-I04. HCOB Introspection Rundown - additional actions, 20 February 1974,Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol. VIII, pp.260-261, Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, 1976.

JCA-IOS. Sea Org HCO Ethics Order, AOSHUK 2543, Confidential Board ofInvestigation-

http://home.snafu.de/tilmanljlgeneral.html 22/08/2003 _ -_ _-- -- -

Findings and - Isolation Watch Heidi D., September 1993.

JCA-106. The Independent, England, 31 January 1994, The Prisoners ofSaint Hill.

JCA-107. Hubbard, "Dianetics and Scientology compared to 19th Century practices", Bulletin of29 November 1981.

JCA-10S. Hubbard, "Criminals and Psychiatry",Bulletin of29 July 1980;

JCA-109. Hubbard, "Scientologyis a religion", Policy Letter of6 March 1969, reprinted in The Organization Executive volume 5, pp.289-290, 1974 printing. lCA-110. Hubbard, "Routine 3 - Heaven", Bulletin of 11 May 1963. lCA. 111.Hubbard, "Confidential Resistive Cases - Former Therapy", Class VIII Bulletin of23 September 1968, lCA-I12. Hubbard, "Ethics Chits", Policy Letter of 1 July 1965, reprinted in The Organization Executive Course, vol.I, pp.703-704, 1991 edition. lCA-113. Hubbard, "Jokers andDegraders", Bulletin and Policy Letter of5 February 1977, reprinted in The Organization Executive Course, volume 1, pp.822-823, 1991 edition.

JCA-114. Hubbard, "A New Type ofCrime", Policy Letter of17 January 1979, reprinted in The Organization Executive Course, volume 1, pp.908-909, 1991 edition.

JCA-I1S. Hubbard,"SuppressiveActs, Suppression ofScientology and Scientologists", Policy Letter of23 December 1965, re-revised 8 January 1991. reprinted in The Organization Executive Course, volume 1, pp.873-889, 1991 edition.

JCA-116. Hubbard, "The Future ofScientology", "Ron's Journal 34", 13 March 1982. lCA-117. Hubbard, "Critics ofScientology", November 1967, reissued as a Bulletin 27 August 1987, reprinted in "Impact" magazine, issue 15,

8. lC8. A-I1Heber Jentzsch letter of7 April 1988.

JCA-119. Hubbard, Electropsychometric Auditing - Operators Manual, 1952.

JCA-l20. HCOB Interrogation (How to read an E-meter on a silent subject), 30 March 1960, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IV, pp.59-60, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-l2l. Board Technical Bulletin Miscellaneous Reports, 7 November 1972R, Auditor Admin Series 20R, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IX, p.53, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-122. HCOPL The Only Valid Security Check, 22 May 1961, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IV, pp.275-281, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-I23. Board Technical Bulletin Integrity Processing Series 1 Definitions, 4 December 1972R, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, voLIX, pp.261-263, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-124. Board Technical Bulletin Integrity Processing Series 16RA, Integrity Processing Info, 6 June 1968RA, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IX, pp.287-288.

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 JCA-125. Hubbard;HCOManual ofJustice, HCO, London, 1959.

JCA-126. HCOB Integrity Processing Series 10R, Integrity Processing Questions Must Be FINed, 13 December 1972R, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IX, p.278.

JCA-127. Mary Sue Hubbard, Guardian Order 121669, Programme: Intelligence: Internal Security, 16 December 1969.

JCA 128.Laurel Sullivan testimony-Church ofScientology ofCalifornia v Armstrong, Los Angeles, case no. C 420 153, vo1.19A,pp.3001-3004, 24 May 1984.

JCA-129. Nancy Dincalci testimony, .CSC v Armstrong, 29 May 1984, vo1.20,pp.3531-3533, 3553, 3568,3569.

JCA-130. Kima Douglas testimony, CSC v Armstrong, 5 June 1984, vo1.25, pp.4437-4439, 4460.

JCA-13 i. testimony ofEdward Walters, CSC v Annstrong, 29 May 1984, voI.20, p. 3585. (see also testimony ofErnest and Adelle Hartwell in the Clearwater Hearings, May 1982).

JCA-132. HCOB Word Clearing, 24 June 1971, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-133. HCOB Confused Ideas, 31 August 1971, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.VII, p.373, CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-134. HCOPL Sanity, 19 May 1970, The Management Series, vol.l, Bridge, LA, 1982.

JCA-135. Board Teclmical Bulletin High Crime Checkouts and Teclmical OKs, 8 March 1975, Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, vol.IX, pp.99-101,CSC, LA, 1976.

JCA-136. HCOPL Policies on Physical Healing, Insanity and Sources ofTrouble, 27 October 1964R, Organization Executive Course, YoU, 2nd edition, 1991.

HCOPL Students to Acceptable Behaviour, 15 December 1965.

JCA-138.HCOBExpanded Green Form 40RD, 30 June 1971RD,Technical Bulletins ofDianetics and Scientology, voI.XII, pp.60-69, CSC, LA, 1980. .

JCA-139. Boards ofDirectors ofthe Churches ofScientology, "Ethics, Cancellation ofFair Game, more about", Policy Letter of22 July 1980.

JCA-140. Hubbard, "Ethics, Suppressive Acts, Suppression ofScientology and Scientologists, the Fair Game Law", Policy Letter of 1 March 1965, reprinted in the Scientology Basic StaffHat Book, number 1, pp.40-44, 1968 edition. . JCA-141. Hubbard, "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Policy Letter of 18 October 1967, reprinted in the Scientology Basic StaffHat Book, number 1, p.26, Church ofScientology ofCalifomia, East Grinstead, 1968.

. JCA-142. Hubbard, "Cancellation ofFair Game", Policy Letter of21 October 1968.

JCA-143. LeifWindle, Morris Budlong & Jane Kember, "Confidential Intelligence Course", 'Guardian-Order of9 September 1974. .

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/jlgeneral.htrnl 22/08/2003 JCA-I44. Sentencing memorandum ofthe United StatesofAmerica, in USA v. Kember and Budlong, US District Court for the District ofColumbia, criminal no. 78401 (2) & (3).

JCA-145. Church ofScientology International, "Cancellation ofIssues on SuppressiveActs and PTSes", Policy Letter of8 September 1983.

JCA-146. Mr. Justice Latey in "B & G wards", Royal Courts ofJustice, 23 July 1984.

Wollersheim v. Church ofScientology ofCalifornia, Court ofAppeal ofthe State of California, civ.no.B023193, 18 July 1989 (upheld by the U,S. Supreme Court, 7 March 1994).

JCA-148. Hubbard, "Dept ofGovemment Affairs", Policy Letter of 15 August 1960,

JCA-149. The Auditor, issue 31.

JCA-150, Hubbard, Overcoming Ups and Downs in Life, "The Antisocial Personality", 1988 edition.

JCA-lSl. Sue Porter, "Suppressive Persons and Suppressive Groups List", Sea Organization Flag Executive Directive, 2S July 1992.

JCA-152. Miscavige, reported in International Scientology News, issue 31.

JCA-lS3. Hubbard, "Ron's Journal, 1967", transcript oflecture, recorded 20 September 1967 (issued as a cassette tape recording in ·1983).

JCA-154. Sentencing Memorandum in USAv MSH et al, US District Court for the District of Columbia, criminal case no. 78-401, pp.I-4 & 14.

JCA-15S. ibid, p.69 (see also Stipulation ofEvidence in this case, where the following eo conspirators or participants named: Joseph Alesi (pp.98, 175); Don Alverzo·(22, 89, IOH); Peeter Alvet (183, 244); Brian Andrus (231, 233, 241, 243, 251, 265); Michael Baum (146); Jim Douglas (249f); Nancy Douglas ("Pitts") (46, 70); Jim Fiducia (239); Janet Finn (183); Martin Greenberg 007, 133); Richard Kimmel (98); Paul Klopper (peripheral involvement) (157, 265); Gary Lawrence (247); Joe Lisa (35,200); John Luke (247);Lynn McNeill (45); Arthur "Artie" Maren (51, 170); John Matoon (248); Carla Moxon (22); Rick Moxon (presumably Kendrick Moxon, attorney) (197, 213f); Jimmy Mulligan(108,180); george Pilat (247); Lexie Ramirez (143); Bruce Raymond (aka Randy Windment) (13lf, 212, 251); Chuck Reese (244, 250); Tom Reitze (Snow White IIC) (142); Mary Rezzonico (107, 170); Michael Taylor (62); Peggy Tyson (71); Bruce Ullman (22, 176); Hugh Wilhere (150); Lt warren Young (San Diego police) (205).

JCA-156 HCOPL The Ethics ofScientology Its Use and Purpose Being a Scientologist, 27 March 1965.

JCA-157. HCOPL Handling the Public Individual, 16 April 1965, issue Ill, Organization Execuitve Course, voLl, 2nd edition, Bridge, LA, 1991. .

JCA-158. What is Scientology?, 2nd edition, p.245, Bridge, LA, 1992.

JCA-159. Declaration ofHon. James M. Ideman, United States District Court, Central District of California, in Religious Technology Center v Scott et at (no. CV 85-711 JMI [Bxj) and Religious Technology Center v Wollersheim et al (no. CV 85-7197 JMI [Bxj), filed 21 June 1993.

JCA-160. James B.Stewart,jr, Scientology's War Against Judges, American Lawyer, December 1980. http://home.snafu.de/tilmanlj/general.html 22/08/2003 JCA-161. The Pledge to Mankind.

JCA-162. Impact, issue 3, 1985, pp.19 & 32.

JCA-163. Conway and Siegelman, Information Disease - Cults Created a New Mental Illness?, Science Digest, January 1982.

httpv/home.snafu.de/tilman/j/general.html 22/08/2003 SCIENTOLOGY

Name: Church of Scientology Founder: Lafayette Ron (L. Ron) Hubbard (1911-1986). Year Founded: 1954

Founding of the group

The source and founder of the Scientology belief is L. Ron Hubbard, a sel-f writer who learned from an early age about the many facets of the human mind alongside an appreciation for eastern philosophies rooted in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism1• His studies at university in mathematics, engineering, and nuclear physics generated a scientific background to his beliefs providing the foundation for his 1950s publication Dianetics: The Modem Science ofMental Health. Although it is contested that Hubbard actually completed and gained quaiifications for his studies.

Interest in Dianetics was quickly gained through its claim to be the 'common peoples science of life and betterment'. Within two months 55,000 copies had been sold and 500 groups discussing his ideas had been formed". Hubbard responded to the popularity of his work by adding a'more religious and spiritual aspect to Dianetjcs thereby creating Scientology - the application of Dianeticsas a religious philosophy developed to 'handle' the spirit and to increase spiritual freedom, intelligence and ability3.

. r Hubbard viewed Scientology as a Western expression of what an older and wiser religion would have looked like - ltapplies the acquisition of wisdom to the key to understanding man's spirit and its purpose in relation to itself and the universe", Dianetics is the primary sacred text of Scientology although members consider the numerous writings and lectures on Dianetics, personal achievement, human evaluation by Hubbard to be sacred as well. The Church of Scientology was established in 1954 as the force which serves to regulate, organise and standardise the teachings of the faith .

The belief

The word Scientology literally means "knowing how to know". Hubbard advocated that man was neithera mind nor a body but that the main concept of man's existence is the soul, a spiritual being called "thetan" (derived from Greek meaning "thought") which he viewed as the backbone of creation and -life. Hubbard claimed to have discovered the conditions which either promote the thetan's survival and realisation offull potential or make it succumb and wither. Scientology is in essence the realisation of these conditions and the use of this knowledge to free the thetan from the physical constraints of the material body and the material universe, which Scientologists call MEST (Matter, Energy, Space, and Time).

In the doctrine of Dianetics there are believed to be two components of the human mind: the 'analytical' and the 'reactive'. The analytical mind is the part of the mind that one is consciously aware of and knowingly utilises. However, beneath the analytical is the reactive mind, which during moments of emotional and physical pain

I Harrison, S (1990) Cults Christopher Helm, Kent 2 bid. 3 bid. Bednarowski, M F (1995) America'sAlternative ReligionsTimothy Miller Ed. 5 Beckford. J (1985) Cult Controversies Tavistock Publications takes control and records what is happening, even though the individual may not be consciously aware. The recordings of the reactive niind are called "engrams"- a persistent impediment to rational thought caused by a painful experience", The inability to attain. full human potential is considered to be the result of undeleted engrams. Therefore, Dianetics is about learning to get rid of the 'vicious reactive mind' so that the thetan could be released and 'go clear' - the term used to describe 7 the analytical mind functioning without the effects the reactive mind •

In addition to understanding how one can free thethetan, the individual needs to learn about the eight dynamics of creation and survival". The dynamics are (in order) self (urge to exist); creativity (the family unit); group survival; species (mankind); life .forms (all living entities), physical universe; spiritual dynamic; and Infinity (the supreme being/God dynamic). The goal of Scientology is to help an individual survive across all of the dynamics from the first to the eighth so that they can develop their control and influence over each dynamic.

The practices

. . . Auditing is the form of personal therapy used to explore an individual's engrams, in order to uncover and deactivate Theauditor conducting the sessions, who has experienced in Scientology, simply listens to the "ore-clear" (the person receiving the auditing) in a quiet room with an e-meter (electropsychometer) which measures physical energy when an engram is pictured", The session involves the auditor asking the pre-clear a series of standardised questions which will probe, the mind to help find and focus on engrams. Through talking and rationalising about the engram the individual will learn to control the engram's effect on the energy of the mind and 'go clear'", . .

Once Scientolog ists 'go clear' they can then progress up the "bridge to total freedom" (freedom from MEST) gaining a greater sense of self-actuallsatlon", Ultimately Scientologists strive to become an Operating Thetan where they may "know...immortality and freedom from the cycle of birth and death" (Church document). At this level the therapy goal will be realised and the thetan can be released from the confines of the reactive mind to achieve a 'god-like' condition which will survive the human body12. .

In addition to auditing, Scientologists attend lectures and courses to develop their understanding of Scientology and its role in civilising societies..The knowledge generated through their study can be implemented to improve an individual's quality of life as well as their participation in the communities in which they live. Hubbard provides explanations and advice for societal issues like drug and alcohol abuse, crime, and various problems affecting families. Through understanding why these issues exist, Scientologists claim they can help to alleviate them", Scientology at its most basic is a tool for self-improvement and self-understanding which aims to equip people to better handle Iife14.

e Wilson, BR (1992) Social Dimension of Sectarianism Clarendon Press, Oxford 1 Harrison, S (1990) CultsChristopher Helm, Kent 8 Bednarowski, M F (1995) America's AlternativeReligions Miller Ed.

10 BR (1992) The SocialDimension of Sectarianism Clarendon Press, Oxford 11 Beckford, J (1985) Cult Tavislock Publications 12 Wilson, B R (1992) Social Dimension of Sectarianism Clarendon Press, Oxford 13 ibid. Beckford, J (1985) Cult Tavislock Publications Organisation

The membership of Scientology is difficult to ascertain due to the multiple levels in which an individual can enter into the Church of Scientology. For example. one can attend a lecture, read Dianetics or become a fully-fledged member of the church in either of the 3,000 churches, missions and organisations located in 140 different countries around the world. on the number are around 8 - 10 million at anyone time, 200,000 members currently on the UK mailing list.

Scientology attracts a wide range of people, although there are some common -characteristics amongst members. On average members are white, married, in their late 20s with above average educational qualifications and a white-collar occupation15.

Scientology is a formidable global ideology and product that uses money and strong leadership to transcend across different nations16. The Church of Scientology is managed by the 'Church of Scientology International', with -headquarters in Los Angeles, and a second tier of regional management centres, for example Saint Hill Manorin Sussex. Perhaps one of most important organisations in the Church is the Religious Technology Centre, which ensures that Dianetics and Scientologyare taught in accordance with Hubbard's original doctrine.

Additionally, the Church ofScientologyoffers a variety of services to its members and non-members. The basic level of Scientology includes IHELP, an organisation that helps auditors to minister outside the realm of the Church.. Other organisations linked to the church include WISE (the World Institute of Scientology Enterprise), which promotes Scientology's applicability in the business world, the CCHR (Citizen's Commission on HumanRights) that fights psychiatry (one of Scientology's avowed enemies), andthe Cult Awareness Reform Group (an anti-CAN group). Furthermore, thirteen celebrity centres are located throughout the world prOViding programs geared specifically towards artists who can afford the luxury services offered by the church.

The Church of Scientology also created Narcanon, a drug-abuse treatmentprogram and Criminon, which aims to rehabilitate criminals Both programmes are run in America and to extent within the UK. They are comprised a set of courses, exercises, drills and study steps that work on both the mind and the body to remove either the effects of drugs from a person or .the need to commit crime. Opponents of Scientology would argue that these programmes are recruitment purposes rather than for legitimate rehabilitation.

Controversies

Without a doubt, Scientology is one of the most controversial new religious movements in the modem world. Few other groups have received such negative publicity or suspicion with regard to their activities and practices. Below is an outline of some of the controversies concerning the group in recent years. ..

•A religion? Opposition to the Church of Scientology is primarily due to a general suspicion of the group and its claim to be a religion. In its basic form, Dianetics was not a religion but

15 Becl

• Cost courses: To advance in Scientology, members must attend courses, lectures, auditing and read from Hubbard's books, all of which are typically paid for by the group member or 'client'. Therefore,.strong criticism has been launched against Scientology in relation to the sharply ascending costs of the courses that Scientologists are required to attend. The Bournemouth Evening Echo claimed that courses for Scientology cost between £30 - £15,000 depending on the level and intensity of the course (19/09/1996), although other groups would argue that there is no' upper limit to the cost of courses.

• Court action: The Church ofScientology is an aggressive defender of its sacred texts and reputation. There a need to maintain the 'trade secrets' of the group to protect its belief system from being destroyed in the public arena". The church has gone to in the past to keep its texts secret through legal battles and litigation. In September 1998, the.Church was awarded $3 million dollars as the result of a lawsuit filed by the Church against Grady Ward, who will have to pay the Church of Scientology$200 per month and no longer post the texts on the Internet

• Harassment and intimidation: Scientology's attack on its critlcsls ·part ·of a policy formulated by Hubbard in the 21 1960s, which he called ,, 'Fair Game" defending through attacking • Very simply, this doctrine declares that enemies of the Church "may be deprived of property or injured by means by any Scientologistwithout any discipline of the Scientologists. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed" (from Hubbard's original Hubbard Communlcations Office Policy Letter). Though the Church officiaUystates that it no longer·advocates "fair game," its actions continue to prove otherwise. One example of intimidation from the Church Scientology was reported by the production for the Channel 4 programme 'Secret Lives'. In episode from the series was devoted to the.Church of Scientology - the investigations into the group provoked the church to harass the production in order to prevent the screening of the documentary. John Travolta was said to have personally written to Channel 4 expressing concerns over the content of the programme and requesting its cancellation - this failed and the programme was aired 19/11/97.

• Fraud and finances: In 28/11/96 The Guardian reported on a scandal involving the falsifying of finances and fraud within the Church of Scientology. Ex-members of the group revealed how they were convinced to part with thousand's of pounds or obtain loans to give as donations to the Church of Scientology as part of their devotion to the faith. In

17Wilson, B R (1992) The SocialDimension ofSectarianism Clarendon Press, Oxford 18 Kent, S A (1998) The G/obafisation of Scientofogy www.gospelcom.neVapologeticsindexlsd4a13.html 19 Harrison, S (1990) CuftsChristopher Helm, Kent ibid. 21 S A (1998) The Globalisation of Scientologywww.gospefcom.neUapologeticsindexlsd4a13.html France 1999 a former Scientology official was jailed after he defrauded disciples with bogus stress treatments costing from £2,000 - £15,000 each for a group of 10 22 people •

• Exploitative and a danger to the vulnerable --the Usa McPherson case: Usa McPherson was 36 years old and a devoted member of the Church Scientology spending up to $175,000 and 40% of her income on her studies into the faith. In November 1995 she was involved in a minor traffic accident and was taken to a nearby hospital. Once the hospital, Usa had mentally deteriorated and the doctors wanted to perform some psychiatric tests to determine her condition. However, within of arriving at hospital, representatives from the Church of Scientology had arrived and refused treatment for Usa on her behalf citing the .psychiatric tests were against their religion. Instead, Usa was taken to a nearby hotel owned by the church, 17 days later she was found dead. The autopsy report stated that Usa had died of severe dehydration and bed rest which had caused a blood clot. It was claimed that she could not have received food or water for the last 23 5 days.of her life and that her body was covered in cockroach bites •

In their defence, the church claims that Lisa would not eat or drink and that she repeatedly banged her head on the which would account for the blood clot which killed her.. Critics claim that this case highlights the dangerous techniques employed by L. Ron Hubbard on the mind. His legacy of suspicion of psychiatry and his theory of leaving people in isolation to help them through a breakdown was seriously misjudged enabling a vulnerable person to die unnecessarily. Through demonising the work of psychiatrists, Scientology may be dangerous to those...who mentally unstable and need safe medical aid. The use of Narcanon and Criminon provide further opportunities for the group to spread their beliefs; however some of the people using these schemes may be mentally vulnerable requiring psychiatric.help - which they are denied through these programmes.

• Fear of the group: The group has actively pursued ex-members .'of Scientology if they are caught slandering its name. Members are advised not to.be negative of the group or of its leadership. Members have told of how they used to try and avoid thinking of negative thoughts in case these were discovered on the e-meter or during auditing sessions. If these were recorded they would be sent for punishment. Although largely this fear has helped to keep the practices and beliefs within the top-tier of Scientology secret and from scrutiny from beyond the group, there is much rnaterial Scientology in the public domain.

International perspective

Within America the Church of Scientology is accepted and supported as a religion. Many have conceded that the cultural optimism within America at its conception enabled Scientology to gain a foothold as a religion within the country", Beyond the United States, acceptance of scientology is limited toa few countries, most 2 Australia has full support and recognition of Scientology as a religion • However, the vast majority of Western states appear sceptical of the church with the

22 Independent 16/11/99 23 http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nnns/scientology.htmf Wilson. B R (1992) TheSocialDimension ofSectarianism Clarendon Press, Oxford ibid. . general Government consensus being that the church is less faith based and more business orientated". ',

The church has faced its greatest opposition in Germany, where it is perceived as an exploitative cult thatthreatens Germany's democracy. German Scientologists are prohibited from publicjobs and are under close .surveillance from the Government. Although in February 2003 the courts within Germany ruled that the Church of Scientcilogy.was .eligible .for breaks. Within France high-ranking officials within the Church"have beenarrested on . suspicion of fraud and mental manipulation towards their members. The charge of mental manipulation was the product of a new law passed in 2001 which outlaws any activity .which may affect an individual's rational thought. Greece has ordered Scientology out of the country andSwitzerland and Belgium have tong running investigations in to the church and its practices.

Whilst the Western European states have resisted Scientology, the church has been expanding its missionary activity into poorer countries like Peru, Trinidad and Sierra Leone. Furthermore,i! has been said that the fall of the Iron Curtain has meant that there are new purse strings for the Church of Scientology to explore 'and exploit".

Within the UK, Scientology, although not officially recognised as a religion, has had varying degrees of acceptance. Its major achievements on the road to formal are:

• 23/04/96 - Independent Television Commission decided that the church was SUitable religious advertiser. • 25/04196 - Radio Authority declared that Scientology could advertise on the radio. • September 1996 - First aired adverts on satellite television - called 'goodwill messages'. These to be on the UK Gold and Living TV channels. Prof. James Beckford was involved in the consultation surroLinding the ITC's decision to let the Church of Scientology advertise on Sky. • 09/10/96 - Royal Navy confirmed that Scientology was a recognised religion.

Adapted from: . http://religiousm6vements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/scientology.html Research @ INFORM

Statistics on the Church of Scientology from INFORM

We have received 313 enquiries about the Church of Scientology (CoS) since 1996.

Again, the largest category of enquirers has been the media with 62 enquiries. A large proportion of these have been about certain issues: CoS's status the Charity Commission, CoS's status as a religion in general, CoS' status. in various countries worldwide and CoS' advertising campaigns.

The second largest category of enquiries has been from students (32) requiring information for various projects.

26 Kent, SA (1998) G/oba/isation ofScientologywww.gospelcom.netlapologeticsindexlsd4a13.hlml Z7 Kent, S A (1998) G/obalisation ofScientologywww.gospelcom.netlapologeticsindexlsd4a13.hlml The third largest category of enquirers has been parents of members (29 enquiries). Concerns raised here are often financial in nature - the amount of money spent on attending courses. Some parents state that their child has changed and no longer has time to see them, but others state that their child seems happy, and they just want more information. Similar enquiries were made by the children of members (4), partners of members (6), siblings of members friends/colleagues of members (17).

.We have received 26 enquiries from current members of CoS. Approximately half were from .members who expressed doubts over their involvement, and half were . from CoS leaders regarding various matters.

6 enquiries were from prospective members, 7 from ex-members.

A large number of enquiries have been received from government bodies (27) and legal bodies (17).

11 enquiries were made by the public, a number of which were due to the caller haVing seen CoS advertisements. Other enquiries include: 6 from chaplains; 13 from church network, 2 from student unions; and 2 from advice agencies.

Again, the largest number of enquiries were received in 1997 (100 enquiries). This seems in part to have been due to The Vanessa Programme which did something on CoS. In 2002, 26 enquiries were received. CHARITY COMMISSION

DECISION OF THECOMMISSIONERS

APPLICATION BY THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY (ENGLAND AND WALES) FOR REGISTRATION AS A CHARITY

Church ofScientology (the.Church) is an international organisation which promotes a beliefsystem, doctrines and practices known as Scientology. The international headquarters ofthe Church are in the United States, but assets which are owned by the Church in this country are currently held and administered by a branch ofthe Church incorporated in Australia. The Church has now established a company incorporated under the Companies Acts and limited by guarantee called Church ofScientology (England and Wales) (CoS ) to further its work in thiscountry. In September 1996, CoS applied to the Commission for registration as a charity pursuant to section 3(2) of the Charities Act 1993. Since that date CoS has had a regular dialogue with the Commission about the application.

The application made by CoS was supported by a full legal and factual case and expert evidence . CoS argues that it is a body established for the charitable purpose ofthe advancement ofreligion under the third head ofcharity law, or, in the alternative, ifnot so established, that it is established for a charitable purpose which promotes the moral or spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community under the fourth head ofcharity law. Whether under the third head or fourth head ofcharity law, CoS argues that it is established for the public benefit.

A significant element in the application made by CoS is that the Commissioners ought to have regard to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which is not directly applicable until the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) is in force. This is likely to be in October 2000. Once the HRA is implemented, it will be unlawful for the Commissioners, as a public authority, to act in a way incompatible withECHR. This would include decisions of the Commissioners with regard to the registration ofcharities. Any common law authorities would accordingly need to be interpreted in a way consistent with ECHR as interpreted by case law ofthe European Court ofHuman Rights and opinions and decisions ofthe European Commission. Until the HRA is in force, the Commissioners are under no clear legal obligation to take into account ECHR in considering issues related to charitable status and accordingly the registration ofcharities.

The Commissioners however decided that as a matter ofgood practice, prudence and indirect legal obligation, they would, in considering CoS's application for registration as a charity, construe the relevant legal authorities,where they were ambiguous, in a way compatible with ECHR and would otherwise take a broad and flexible approach to the relevant legal authorities in keeping with their policy and practice concerning the recognition ofnew charitable purposes as set out in the Report ofthe Charity Commissioners for 1985 at paras. 24-27.

The Commissioners having considered the full legal and factual case put to them by CoS, and having reviewed the relevant law, taking into account the principles embodied in ECHR where appropriate, decided that CoS was not established for charitable purposesor for public benefit and was therefore not registrable as a charity under section 3(2) of the Charities Act 1993. In making that determination the Commissioners further concluded as follows:

(I) That CoS is not charitable as an organisation established for the charitable purpose of the advancement ofreligion because, having regard to the relevant law and evidence, Scientology is not.a religion for the purposes ofEnglish charity law.

(a) The Commissioners considered that the legal authorities establishing the meaning of religion in charity law were ambiguous, but having construed such authorities in a way compatible with ECHR they concluded that the definition ofreligion was characterised by a belief in a supreme being and an expression ofbeliefin that supreme being through worship. Re South Place Ethical Society [1980]1 WLR 1565, Dillon Jatp. D-E.

(b) The Commissioners decided thatthe concept ofa supreme being was broader than the theistic concept ofa personal creator god, but otherwise it would not be proper to specify the precise nature ofthat concept require it to be analogous to the deity or supreme being ofany particular religion. However the Commissioners did not find themselves compelled to reject the concept oftheism altogether nor to accept the abstract concept ofthe notion ofa supernatural thing or principle.

The Commissioners concluded that Scientology believed in a supreme being.

(c) The Commissioners decided that the criterion ofworship would be met where the beliefin a supreme being found its expression in conduct indicative ofreverence veneration for the supreme being. R v Registrar General ex parte Segerdal[1970] 2 QB, 697 Winn LJatp. 709A. It was not possible to worship an ethical or philosophical ideal with reverence. Re South Place Ethical Society, Dillon J at p. 1573A. Worship may manifest itselfin particular activities which might include-acts ofsubmission, veneration, praise, thanksgiving, prayer or intercession. R v Registrar General ex parte Segerdal, Buckley LJat p. 709 F-G.. The Commissioners having considered the activities ofauditing and training, which Scientology regards its worship, concluded that auditing is more akin to therapy or counselling and training more akin to study and that both auditing and training are not in their essence exhibitions ofreverence paid to a supreme being and such Scientology practices are not worship for the purposes ofcharity law.

The Commissioners decided that auditing and training do not constitute worship as defined and interpreted from the legal authorities.

(2) That CoS was established for the charitable purpose ofpromoting the moral or spiritual welfare and improvement ofthe community.

(a) The Commissioners considered that CoS was not analogous to the established legal authorities which governed this area ofthe law. Re Scowcroft [1898]2 Ch 638, Re Hood [1931]1 Ch 240, Re Price [1943] Ch 422, Re South Ethical Society. They concluded CoS was not analogous to the decided cases because it promoted a formal and highly structured system ofbelief(which it regarded as a religion), necessitating membership ofor adherence to a particular organisation for access to or participation in its doctrines, practices and beliefs such that these were not generally available to the public at large. However the Commissioners further concluded that these legal authorities were ambiguous.

2 (b) The Commissioners considered and interpreted these authorities compatibly with ECHR and concluded that the key aspects ofthe charitable purpose ofpromoting the moral and spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community which could be discerned from these authorities was that the doctrines, beliefs and practices involved were generally accessible to the public and capable ofbeing applied or adopted by them according to individual judgement or choice from time to time in such a way that the moral and spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community might result. Re Price, Cohen J at p. 432. Accordingly, the Commissioners concluded, it would be possible for non-religious belief systems promoted by a membership organisation to be established for such a purpose ifthose criteria were satisfied.

(c) The Commissioners considered in relation to the doctrines and practices ofCoS whether these were so accessible and capable ofsuch application, but concluded that because ofthe nature and organised practice ofthe beliefs ofScientology they were on balance neither so accessible nor could be so applied such that the moral and spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community might result.

(3) That CoS was not established for the public benefit.

In considering the legal test applied to organisations established for purposes falling within the first three heads ofcharity law in that they were entitled to the presumption ofpublic benefit and the different legal test applied to the fourth head ofcharity law where public benefit had to be demonstrated, the Commissioners considered that such a distinction between the legal tests was consistent with ECHR. Public benefit was a requirement ofcharity and needed to be established in every case. Public benefit was therefore considered ona case by case basis. Under the first three heads of charity, it had been established that public benefit was presumed to exist although in individual cases it may need to be proved ifthere was evidence to the contrary. For the fourth head ofcharity, public benefit needed to be established although there were cases where it may be selfevident and need not be proved.

The Commissioners considered whetherifCoS had been established for the charitable purpose ofadvancing religion, it was also established for the public benefit.

The Commissioners considered the presumption ofpublic benefit applicable to organisations established for the advancement ofreligion. They concluded that, as in the case ofall organisations established for charitable purposes, public benefit had to be present in fact for an organisation established for the advancement ofreligion to be charitable. Coats v Gilmour CA [1948J Ch 340, Lord Greene at p. 344. They further considered that in the case ofsuch organisations, the presumption may be rebutted by evidence indicating public benefit may not be present and such evidence was not confined to evidence suggesting that the organisation was adverse to religion or subversive ofmorality. Coats v Gilmour, C.A., Lord Greene MR at p. 345, In re Hetherington, decd.[1990J Ch 1, Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson v.c. at p. 12 D G.

The Commissioners decided that in the case ofCoS, the relative newness of Scientology and the judicial and public concerns which had been expressed about its beliefs and practices, led them to conclude that it should not be entitled to the presumption ofpublic benefit. Accordingly, it was for CoS to demonstrate that it was established for the public benefit.

3 The Commissioners considered the legal test ofpublic benefit to be applied to organisations established for the advancement ofreligion. They concluded that where the practice ofreligion is essentially private, or is limited to a private class of individuals not extending to the public generally, the element ofpublic benefit will not be established.' re Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson v.c. at p. 12 D-G, Coats v Gilinour CA, LordEvershed at'p. 357. Commissioners considered that this test must be applied to the core practices ofsuch an organisation and not to incidental activities or other activities which may already be regarded as charitable.

After reviewing the practices ofauditing and training, considered by CoS to be the central features ofthe practice ofScientolo gy, the Commissioners considered that these are fact conducted in private and not in public and that in their very nature are private rather than public activities such that no legally recognised benefit could be said to be conferred on the public. It could not be concluded that the benefits ofthe practice ofScientology extended beyond the participants. Accordingly public benefit was not established.

The Commissioners went on to consider whether, if CoS had been established for a charitable purpose ofpromoting themoral or spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community, it was also established for the public benefit. The Commissioners. considered that it was for CoS to establish public benefit as this was a purpose falling within the fourth head ofcharity law. The Commissioners considered the relevant legal test ofpublic benefit to be applied to organisations established under the fourth head ofcharity. The Commissioners concluded that the test was that the whole tendency ofcharity in the legal sense under the fourth head is towards tangible and objective benefits but that in the case ofan intangible benefit that at least approval by the common understanding ofenlightened opinion for the time being would be necessary before an intangible benefit could be taken to constitute sufficient benefit to . the community. National Anti Vivisection Society v IRC[1948J AC31, Lord Wright atp. 49. The Commissioners considered that in the case ofthe purpose ofpromoting the moral or spiritual welfare or improvement ofthe community, and thus ofCoS, the issue was one ofintangible benefit and that in relation to intangible benefit the Commissioners considered the legal test to refer to a common consensus ofopinion amongst people who were fair minded and free from prejudice or bias.

The Commissioners considered the core practices ofScientology, namely auditing and training, and concluded that the private conduct and nature ofthese practices together with their general lack ofaccessibility meant that the benefits were ofa personal as opposed to a public nature. Accordingly, following the legal test referred to above, public benefit had not been established.

00000

4 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Background Papers

German Washington. D.e.

Welcome Information Culture Life Education Business Services Research Technology

Germany Info Home:Information Archives: Background Papers: Background Papers

Background Papers Newsletters

Scientology and Germany Sub You c Understanding the German View ofScientology issue

The German government considers the Scientology organization a enterprise With a history Archives - vulnerable ofany is also that the organization's totalitarian structure and methods may pose a risk to Germany's democratic society. Several kinds of evidence have influenced this view of Scientology, including the organization's activities in the United States.

There are three notable American court cases involving Scientology that illustrate why Germany's concerns about this organization are justified. In the early 1980s, American courts convicted 11 top Scientologists for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break into government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting . In 1994, in a case involving Lawrence Wollersheim, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a California court's of substantial evidence that Scientology practices took place in a coercive environment and rejected Scientology's claims Headlines that the practices were protected under religious freedom guaranties. In September 1997, the Illinois Supreme Court found there was evidence enough to allege that Scientology had driven Background Pap· the Cult Awareness Network into bankruptcy by filing 21 lawsuits Domestic Top in a 17-month period. The court stated that "such a sustained International' onslaught of litigation can hardly be deemed 'ordinary', if [the Network] can prove that the actions were brought without The Week in Gel probable cause and malice." Deutschland Na< In addition, a New York Times article on March 9, 1997, outlined "an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by Scientology against the [IRS] and people who work there. Among the findings were Speeches these : Scientology's lawyers hired private investigators to dig into the private lives of IRS officials and to conduct surveillance Press Releases operations to uncover potential vulnerabilities." A related New York Times article on December 1, 1997, added that earlier IRS Business News refusals to grant tax exemption "had been upheld by every court." (On December 30, 1997, a Wall Street Journal article outlined details of the $12.5 million tax settlement between the IRS and Scientology, including theSclentoloqy agreement to drop thousands of lawsuits against the IRS.)

On December 1, 1997, a New York Times article described Scientology records seized in an FBI raid on church offices that prove "that Scientology had come to Clearwater with a written Email This Ar plan to take control of the city. Government and community organizations were infiltrated by Scientology members. Plans were undertaken to discredit and silence critics. A fake hit-and run accident was staged in 1976 to try to ruin the political career of the mayor. A Scientologist infiltrated the local newspaper and reported on the paper's plans to her handlers." A related Times article also on Dec. 1, 1997, reported on a criminal investigation into Scientoiogy's roie in member's Clearwater,

any-info.orz/relaunch/info/archives/backgroundlscientology.html 15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Background Papers or I

In November 199B, the responsible State Attorney charged Scientology's Flag Service Organization with abuse or neglect of a disabled adult and practicing medicine without a license.

Given this background, Germany, as well as Belgium, France, Great Brita in, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, Israel and Mexico, remain unconvinced that Scientology isa religion.

Scientology has never disputed the neutrality of Germany's mdependent judicial system. In courts, the Scientolog ists ' cases often deal with the organization's desire for tax exemptions. The Federal Labor Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) ruledon March 22, 1995, that the branch in Hamburg was not a religious congregation, but clearly a commercial enterprise. In its . decision, the court quotes one of L. Ron Hubbard 's instructions "make money, make more money -- make other people produce so as to make money" and concludes that Scientology purports to be a "church" merely as a cover to pursue its economic interests. In a November 6, 1997, decision, the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltunqsqerlcht) sent a case back to a lower court saying it was irrelevant whether Scientology was a religion. The court stated that the Scientology organization's legal status must bejudqed by Its level of commercial activity.

In to numerous petitions, Including from relatives . and former members and one signed by over 40,000 concerned . citizens, the German Parliament (Bundestag) established a study commission to gather factual Information on the goals, activities and practices of "so-called sects and psychological groups." The commission, which was not focused exclusively on Scientology, neither examined religious and ideological views nor prepared a list of groups active in Germany. Following two years of study, In June 1998 the commission issued a final report which included a recommendation that the OffiCe for the Protection of the Constitution keep Scientology under observation (see Fact Sheet).

The Federal Government. has also conducted thorough studies on the Sclentology organization. Expert reports and testimony by former members confirm again and again that membership can lead to psychological and physical dependency, financial ruin and even suicide.

Because of its experiences dUring the Nazi regime, Germany has a special responsibility monitor the development of any extreme group within its borders even when the group's members are small in number. Given the indisputable evidence that the Scientology organization has repeatedly attempted to interfere with the American government and has harmed individuals within Germany, the German federal government has responded in a very measured legal fashion to the Scientology organization. On June 6, 1997, Federal and State Ministers of the Interior asked the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) to formally investigate several activ ities of the Scientology organization and make a report. The published report presented October 12, 199B, found that while "the Scientology organization agenda and activities are marked by objectives that are fundamentally and permanently directed at abolishing the free democratic basic order," additional time is needed to conclusively evaluate the Scientology organization. The ministers approved this request for more time.

FACT SHEET ON SCIENTOLOGY

Should Scientology Be Considered a Religion?

In its ads and writings, the Scientology organization claims is internationally recognized as a religion, except in Germany. This false.

15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Background Papers I

Among the countries that do not consider Scientology a religion are Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, and Spain, as well as Israel and Mexico.

In the United States, the Scientology organization did in fact receive tax-exempt status as a religious congregation in 1993 - after a decades-long, contentious battle with the IRS. Referring to this battle, The New York Times in a front-page article published March 9, 1997, "found that the (tax) exemption followed a series of unusual Internal IRS actions that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by against the agency and people who work there. Among the findings were these: Scientology's lawyers hired private investigators to dig into the private lives of IRS officials and to conduct surveillance operations to uncover potential vulnerabilities." A related New York Times article on December 1, 1997, added thatearlier IRS refusals to grant tax exemption "had been upheld by court." {On December 30, 1997, a Wall Street Journal article outlined details of the $12.5 million tax settlement between the IRS and Scientology, including the"Scientology agreement to drop thousands of lawsuits against the IRS.)

In Germany, there is no process by which the government officially recognizes a religion. However tax authorities grant tax exempt status to organizations that act the public Interest and are non-profit. Some 10,000 groups have requested and received tax free status, but to date, the Scientology organization ·has repeatedly failed to establish its qualifications. Among the that are tax free are the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons.

Two of the highest German courts recently dealt with involving the Scientology organization. On March 22, 1995, the Labor Court ruled that the Scientology branch in Hamburg was not a religious congregation, but clearly a commercial enterprise. In its decision, the court quotes one of L. Ron Hubbard's instructions "make money,=make more money make other people produce so as to make money" and concludes that Scientology purports to be a "church" merely cover to pursue its economic interests.

In a November 6, 1997, decision, the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) sent a case back to a lower court saying it was irrelevant whether Sclentology was a religion. The court stated that the Scientology organization's legal status must be judged by its level of commercial actiVity.

Also in France, the Scientology organization is neither a religion nor a non-profit institution. The organization's Paris head office was closed in early 1996 for not paying back taxes

In Great Britain, the Scientology organization has been rebuffed repeatedly by the Charity Commission which insisted as recently as 1995 that the organization could not be considered a religion under British law and could, therefore, not enjoy any tax-exempt status.

Is Scientology a Threat?

In its March 22, 1995, the Federal alsQ found that Often members are separated from their families and is structured so as to make the individual and financially system.

In response to numerous petitions, including those from relatives and former members and one signed by over 40,000 concerned the German Parliament (Bundestag) established a study

_./I fo on:r/relaunch/info/archiveslbackground/scientology.html 15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Background

commission in 1996 to gather factual Information on the goals, activities and practices of "se-called sects and psychological groups." The commission Included 12 experts from the fields of justice, sociology, psychology, education, religious studies and theology. The commission, which was not focused exclusively on Scientology, neither examined religious and ideological views nor is it preparing a list of groups active in Germany. Following two years of study, in June 1998 the commission issued a final report which included a recommendation that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution keep Scientology under observation. below Federal and

In the United States, there are three notable court cases Involving Scientology that illustrate why Germany's concerns about this organization are justified. In the early 1980s, American courts convicted 11 top Scientologists for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break into government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting. In 1994,ln a case involving Lawrence Wollersheim, the a court's finding of substantial evidence that Scientology practices took Iplace in a coercive environment and rejected Sclentology's claims that the practices were protected under religious freedom guaranties. In September 1997, the Illinois Supreme Court found there was evidence enough to allege that Sclentology had driven the Cult Awareness Network into bankruptcy by filing 21 lawsuits in a 17-month period. The court stated that "such a sustained onslaught of litigation can hardly be deemed 'ordinary', If [the Network] can prove that the actions were brought without probable cause and with malice."

On December 1, 1997, a New York Times article described Scientology records seized in an FBI raid on church offices that prove "that. Scientology had come to Clearwater witha written plan to take control of the city. Government and community organizations were infiltrated by Scientology members. Plans were undertaken to discredit and silence critics. A fake hit-and run'accident was staged in 1976 to try to ruin the political career of the mayor. A Scientologist infiltrated the local newspaper and reported on the paper's plans to her handlers." A related Times article also on Dec. 1, 1997, reported on a criminal investigation into Scientology's role In a member's death in Clearwater, Florida. In November 1998, the responsible State Attorney charged Scientology's Flag Service Organization with abuse or neglect of a , disabled adult and practlclng medicine without a license.

Other countries, too, view the Scientology organization with great concern. In France, a government commission led by then -Prime Minister Juppe, and charged with monitoring the activities of sects, first convened in mid-November 1996. On November 1996, French courts in Lyon judged several leading SCie.ntologists 1 guilty of Involuntary manslaughter and fraud in a case where methods taught by Sclentology were found to driven a person to suicide.

In Greece, a judge declared in January 1997 that an Athens Scientology group was illegal after ruling that the group had used false pretenses to obtain an operating license.

Federal and Regional Action Taken Against the Scientologists in Germany

On June 6, 1997, Federal and State Ministers of the Interior asked the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) to formally investigate several activities of theScientology organization and make a report. The published report presented October 1998, found that while "the Scientology organization agenda and activities are marked by objectives that are fundamentally and permanently directed at the free democratic order," additional time is needed to conclusively evaluate the ScientoJogy organization. The

httn'//www. ves/background/scientology.html 15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Backgrounu r'apers

ministers approved this request for more time.

Some of the German states have also responded to Scientology. Bavaria requires all applicants for admission to Bavarian public service to indicate any connections to the Scientology organization. Applications acknowledging a tie reviewed on a case-by-case basis. To date, Bavaria has not rejected any such applications.

What is the Truth about the ,

In its campaign to discredit Germany, Scientology uses the tactic of supplying only incomplete Information to back up its claims, making it extremely difficult for the German government to . research and respond to charges. However, the German government continues its attempts to investigate Scientologists allegations, as it would any citizen's.

The Sclentologists' repeated allegations that artists belonging to Sclentology cannot perform In Germany are false. Freedom of artistic expression is guaranteed In Article 5 (3) of the German Basic Law (Germany's Constitution), thus artists are free to perform or exhibit In Germany anywhere they please.

Jazz pianist Chick Corea performed in Germany on March 24, 1996, during the 27th International Jazz Week held in Burghausen, an event which received approximately $10,000 in funding from the Bavarian Ministry of Culture.

"Mission Impossible," starring Tom Cruise, was a hit in Germany, grossing $23.6 million.

Likewlse, the Scientologlsts' claim that a teacher who taught near the city of Hannover was fired for her beliefs is untrue. The woman was not fired, though repeatedly violated school regulations by using the classroom to recruit students and their parents to Scientology. After multiple warnings, the woman was transferred from classroom to administrative duties to prevent further violations.

Contrary to Scientology's allegations, no child can be prevented from attending public school in Germany. In fact, like all children in the country, SCientologists children must be enrolled in either public or private institutions.

The Scientology Public Relations Campaign Against Germany

The Church of Scientology has waged an aggressive campaign against Germany. full-page ads in the New York Times and . the Washington Post that began in October 1996, the Scientology organization has compared the treatment of Scientologists In present-day Germany with that of the Jews under the Nazi regime. This is 'not only a distortion of the facts, but also an insult to the victims of the Holocaust. Officials in Germany the U.S. have repeatedly spoken out against this blatant misuse of the Holocaust. Ignatz Bubis, the recently deceased chairman of the Council of Jews In Germany who was Germany's top Jewish leader, denounced the comparison as "false." On June 6, 1997, the State Department's spokesman again defended Germany, saying:

"Germany needs to be protected, the German Government and the German leadership need to be.protected from this wild charge made by the Church of Scientology in the U.S. that somehow the treatment of Scientologists In Germany can or should be compared to the treatment of Jews who had to live, and who ultimately perished, under Nazi rule in the 1930s. This wildly httn·llwww.germanv-info.org/relaunch/info/archiveslbackgroundlscientology.html 15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Archives: Background Papers ot

inaccurate comparison is most unfair to Chancellor Kohl and to his government and to regional governments and city governments throughout Germany. It has been made consistently by supporters of SCientology here in the United States, and by Scientologists themselves. I do want to disassociate the U.S. Government from this campaign. We reject this campaign. Itls most unfair to Germany and to Germans in genera'''.

The Scientology organization has also distributed pamphlets such as Rise of Hatred and Violence in Germany," reiterating its allegations.

An open letter to Chancellor Kohl, written by a Hollywood lawyer with famous Scientology clients, appeared in 1997 in the International Herald Tribune. The letter repeated Scientology organization assertions against Germany and was signed by 34 American celebrities. "Disgraceful and irresponsible" is how Michel Friedman, a member of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, described the letter. He added: "It's totally off the mark. Today, we have a democracy and a state based 'on the rule of law."

FolloWing the letter, the U.S. State Department also criticized the Scientologlsts' public relations campaign, saying, advised the Scientology community not to run those ads because the German government is a democratic government and It govemsa free people. And it is simply outrageous to compare the current German leadership to the Nazi-era leadership. We've told the Sclentologists this, and in this sense we share the outrage of . many Germans to see their government compared to the Nazis."

American Media Reports on Scientology

ABC 20/20 Sunday "A Misunderstood Religion or a Predatory Cult?" (December 20, 1998)

A&E Investigative Reports "Inside Scientology" (December 14, 1998)

NBC Dateline "Bob Minton; One Man's Battle Against Scientology" (June 6, 1998)

.cas Public Eye "The Sad End of Usa McPherson" (January 8, 1998)

CBS 60 Minutes "The Cult Awareness Network" (December 28, 1997)

MagaZine "Scientology: The Cult of Greed" (May 6, 1991) by Richard Behar

New York "$12.5 Million Deal With I.R.S. lifted Cloud Over Scientologists" (December 31, 1997) "Boston Man in Costly Fight with Scientology" (December 21, 1997) "Sclentoloqy Faces Glare of Scrutiny After Florida Parishioner's Death" (December 1, 1997) "In Clearwater, Fla., Grudges Against Scientology Are Slow to Die" (December 1, 1997) "Scientology Denies an Account of an Impromptu I.R.S. Meeting" (March 19, 1997) . "Scientology's Puzzling Journey From Tax Rebel to Tax Exempt" (March 9, 1997) "An Ultra-Aggressive Use of Investigators and the Courts" (March 9, 1997) Douglas Frantz authored the above articles bttn-/Iwww.oerrnanv;in fo.orz/relaunch/info/archives/backzround/scientology.html 15/08/2003 Germany Info: Information Services: Arcnrves: rsacxgrounu

"Who Can Stand Up?" (March 16, 1997) in Journal by Frank Rich

Wall Street Journal ''The Secrets of the Universe" (February 24, 1998) in Review and Outlook "Scientologists and IRS Settled for $12.5 Million" (December 3D, 1997) by Elizabeth MacDonald "The Scientology Problem" (March 25, 1997) in Review and Outlook

Boston Herald Series March 1-5, 1998, by Joseph Mallia "Judge found Hubbard lied about achievements" (March 1) "Inside. the Church of Scientology; Powerful church targets . fortunes, souls of recruits" (March 1) "Church keys programs to recruit blacks" 2) "Milton school shades ties to Scientology" (March 2) "Scientology reaches into schools through Narconon" (March 3) "Church, enemies wage war on Internet battlefield; Copyright laws used to silence onllne foes"(Mar. 4) "Sacred teachings not secret anymore" (March 4) "Battle sites in the Web war" (March 4) "Scientology group reaches kids through PBS videos" (March 5) "Church wields celebrity clout" (March 5)

Providence Journal-Bulletin "The Germans Have a Word for It" (February 5, 1997) by Philip Terzian

Associated Press "U.N. investigator rejects as 'puerile' Scientology's Nazi claim" (March 3, 1998) in Worldstream, International News

2001- 3 Germany Info

,//WWW. 15/08/2003 [Print Vers ion)

.Germany

International Religious Freedom Report 2002 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

The Basic Law (Constitution) provides for religious freedom and the Government generally respects this right in practice; however, there is some discrimination against minority religions.

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report, and government policy continued to contribute to the generally free practice of religion. The not recognize a and views it as an and basedon their beliefs. and state 6lScientologyaS a and from some sectors of business.

The generally relationship among religions in society contributed to religious freedom. However, following a rise in the incidence of anti-Semitic crimes an increase in public criticism of the Israeli Government's actions in the Middle East, Jewish community leaders expressed disappointment in some of the country's political leaders not speaking out more forcefully against anti-Semitism. .

TheU.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country a total area of137,821 square miles, and its population is approximately 82 million. There are no official statistics on religions; however, unofficial estimates and provided by the organizations themselves give an approximate breakdown of the membership of the country's denominations. The Church, which includes the Lutheran, Uniate,and,Reformed Protestant Churches, has 27 million who constitute 33 percent ofthe population. offices in the Evangelical Church estimate that 1.1 million church members (or 4 percent) attend weekly religious services. The Catholic Church has a membership of 27.2 million. or 33.4 percent of the population, According to the Church's statistics, 4.8 million Catholics (or 17.5 percent) actively participate in weekly services. According to government estimates, there are approximately 2.8 to million Muslims living in the country (approximately 3.4 percent to 3.9 percent of the population.) Statistics on mosque attendance were not available.

Orthodox churches have approximately 1.1 million members, or 1.3 percent of the population. The Greek Orthodox Church is the largest, with approximately 450,000 members; the Romanian Orthodox Church has 300,000 members; and the Serbian Orthodox Church has 200,000 members. The Russian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate has 50.000 members, while the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad approximately 28,000 members. The Syrian Orthodox Church has 37,000 members, and the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church has an estimated 35,000 members.

Other Christian churches have approximately 1 million members, or 1.2 percent of the population. These include Adventists with 35.000 members, the Apostolate of Jesus Christ with 18,000 members, the Apostolate of Judah with 2.800 members. the Apostolic Community with 8,000 members, Baptists with 87.000 members, the Christian Congregation with 12,000 members, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) with 39,000. the Evangelical Brotherhood with 7,200 members, Jehovah's Witnesses with 165,000 members, Mennonites with 6,500 members, Methodists with 66,000 members, the New Apostolic Church with 430,000 members, Old Catholics with 25,000 members, the Salvation Army with 2,000 members, Seventh-Day Adventists with 53,000 members, the Union of Free Evangelical

http://www.state.gov/g/drllrls/ir£!2002113936.htm 22/09/2003 churches with 30,500 members, the Union of Free Pentecostal Communities with 16,000 members . the Temple Society with 250 members, and the auakers with 335 members.

Jewish congregations have approximately 87,500 members and make up 0.1 percent of population . According to press reports, the country's Jewish population is growing rapidly, and more than 100,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union have come to the country since 1990. The vast majority of newly arrived Jews come from countries of the former Soviet Union. Not all new arrivals join congregations, hence the discrepancy between population numbers andthe number of congregation members.

The Unification Church has approximately 850 members; the Ghl,JrchofScientofogy has 8,000 members; the Hare Krishna society has 5,000 members; the Johannish Church the Intemational Grail Movement has 2,300 Marga has 3,000 members; and Sri Chinmoy has 300 members.

Approximately 21.8 million persons, or 26.6 percent of the population, either have no religious affiliation or belong to unrecorded religious organizations.

Section 11. Status of Religious Freedom

LegallPolicy Framework

The Basic Law (Constitution) provides for freedom of religion , and the Government generally respects this right in practice.

Church and State are separate, although a special partnership exists between the State and those religious have the they fulfill that the organization is not loyal to the State, organizations may request that they be granted "public law corporation" status, which, other things; entitles themto levy taxes on their members that the State collects for them. Organizations pay a fee to the Government for this service, and all public law corporations do not avail themselves of this privilege. The decision to grant public law corporation status is made at the state level. In 2000 the Federal Constitutional Court passed a groundbreaking ruling in which it found the condition of "loyalty to the state" to be a violation of the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. Therefore, this condition is inadmissible in the catalog of conditions imposed on religious organizations. Many religions and denominations have been granted public law corporation status. Among them are the Lutheran and Catholic Churches and Judaism, as well as the Mormons, Seventh-Day Adventists, Mennonites, Baptists, Methodists, Christian Scientists, and the Salvation Army.

The right of Muslims to slaughter animals ritually without the stunning required by the animal protection law was the subject of a court case thatconcluded in January 2002. In November 2000, the Federal Administrative Court ruled that the Islamic Community of Hessen was not a "religious community" as defined in the animal protection law, which allows religious communities to apply for waivers of animal slaughtering regulations. As a result, MiJslimscould not apply for a waiver; however,theJewish Community wasgranted a waiver shortly after the animal protection law first went into effect in order to slaughter animals by procedures. The Muslim Community appealed the ruling, and in January 2002, the Federal Court ruled thatMuslim butchers could for waivers.

subsidies also provided to some religious organizations for historical and cultural reasons. Some Jewish synagogues have been built with state financial assistance because of the State's role in the destruction of synagogues in 1938 and throughout the Nazi period. Repairs to restoration of some Christian churches and monasteries are undertaken with state financial support because of the expropriation by the State of church lands in 1803 during the Napoleonic period. Having taken from the churches the means by which they earned money to repair their buildings, the State recogn ized an obligation to cover the cost of those repairs . Subsidies are paid out only to those buildings affected by the 1803 .Napoleonic reforms. Newer buildings do not receive subsidies for upkeep. State goverr'lments also subsidize various institutions affiliated with public law corporations, such as church-run schools and hospitals.

Religious organizations do not need to Most religious organizations are registered and treated as nonprofit associations and therefore enjoy tax-exempt status. State level authorities review these submissions and routinely grant this status. Organizations must register at a local or municipal court and provide evidence (through their own statutes) that they are a religion and thus contribute socially, spiritually, or materially to society. Local tax offices occasionally conduct reviews of status

In principle the Central Council of Jews represents the majority of Jewish congregations in the country. However, since the founding of the first liberal congregations in the country in 1997, there were 11 liberal/reform congregations that are represented by the Union of Progressive Jews in Germany, Austria, Switzerland (UPJGAS) . which is not represented on the Central Council, at the end of the period http://www.state.gov/g/drVrls/irf/2002/13936.htm 22/09/2003 coveredby this report.The UPJGASwas seeking to establisha dialogwith the Central Council and the Government in orderto secureaccessto federal and statefunds allocatedfor the purpose of development, support,and stabilityof all GermanJewishcongregations. Such funds are managed throughcontracts betweenthe 16 statesand the state-level Jewishumbrella organizations, which constitute the Central Council.

Most publicschools offer religiousinstruction in cooperation with the Protestant and Catholicchurches and offer instruction in Judaismif enoughstudentsexpressinterest.A nonreligious ethics courseor studyhall generallyis available for studentsnot wishingto participate in religiousinstruction. The issueof Islamic education in publicschoolsis becoming topicalin several states.In 2000 the FederalAdministrative Court upheldprevious court rulingsthat the IslamicFederation qualifiedas a religious community andas a result must be giventhe opportunityto providereligious instruction in Berlinschools.The decisiondrewcriticism from the manyIslamicorganizations that not represented by the IslamicFederation, and the Berlin StateGovernment expressed its concernsaboutthe IslamicFederation's allegedlinksto MiIIi a Turkishgroupclassified as extremistby the Federal Officefor the Protection of the Constitution (OPC). However, after anothercourtdecisionin favor of the IslamicFederation in August2001, Berlinschool authorities decided to allowthe IslamicFederation to beginteaching Islamicreligious classesin several Berlin schools starting in September 2001. In 2000Bavaria announced that it would offer German language Islamiceducation in its public schoolsstarting in 2003.

The right to providereligious chaplaincies in the military, in hospitals, and in prisonsis not dependent on the publiclaw corporation statusof a religious community. The Ministryof Defensewas intothe possibility of Islamicclergymen providingreligious servicesin the military,althoughnone of the many Islamiccommunities has the status of a corporation underpublic law.

Restrictions on ReligiousFreedom

In the Federal Administrative Court in Berlinuphelda Berlin State Governmenfs decisionto deny Jehovah's Witnesses publiclaw corporation The Court concluded that the group did not offer the "indispensable loyalty"towardsthe democraticstate"essential for lastingcooperation" because it forbade its members from participating in publicelections. The group does enjoythe basic tax-exempt status afforded to mostreligious organizations. In 2000members of Jehovah'sWitnessesappealed, and the Constitutional Court their favor, remanding the case back to the FederalAdministrative Courtin Berlin. Forthe first time, the Cdnstitutional Courthad examined the conditions for grantingthe statusof a publiclaw corporation and foundthat reasons of the separation of church and state,"loyaltyt6 the state"cannotbe a condition imposedon religious communities. The Constitutional Courttempered the victoryfor Jehovah's Witnesses by instructing the BerlinAdministrative Courtto examine whether Jehovah's WitneSSeS use coercivemethodsto preventtheir members from leavingthe congregation and whethertheir child-rearing practicesconform to the country'shumanrights· standards. In May 2001,the FederalAdministrative Courtreferredthe casebackdown to the Higher Administrative Courtin Berlin to address the open questions.

and practicesof nonmainstream Statesdefend the practiceby noting their responsibility to respond to citizens' aboutthesegroups.While of the factuaLaod of some inclusionin a movements.. posed by SClentology to the order € e . mental. and financial well-being of example, the Hamburg published"The of the SCientology Organization," outlinesits claim that Scientology tried to infiltrategovernments. offices, and companies, and that the church spieson its opponents, defamesthem, and "destroys"them. In 1998the Federal OPCconcluded that although there was no imminentdangerof infiltration by Scientology into high levelsof the politicalor economic powerstructures,there were indications of tendencies within Scientology, supportedby its ideologyand programmatic goals,which could be seen as directedagainstthe country's free and democratic order and that the public shouldbe informed of these dangers.

The Church of Scientology, which operates 18 churches missions, remained under scrutinyby both federaland stateofficials, who contendthat its ideologyis opposedto democracy.Since t997 Scientology has been underobservation by the Federaland StateOPC's. In observing an organization, OPC officials seekto collectinformation, mostly from writtenmaterials and firsthand accounts, to assesswhethera "threat"exists.Moreintrusive methodswould be subjectto legal checks and would require evidence of involvement in treasonous or terrorist activity.Federal OPC authorities stated that no requestshad been madeto employmoreintrusivemethods, nor were any such requestsenvisioned. One state, Schleswig Holstein, does not implement observation; state officialshave concluded that Scientology does not have an activelyaggressive attitudetowards the Constitution-the conditionrequired by the state's law to permit the OPCobservation.

In December 2001,the Berlin Regional Administrative Court held that the Berlin OPC could not employ undercover agents to continuethe observation of Scientology's activitiesin the state Berlin.The Court http://www.state.gov/gldrVrls/irf72002/13936.htm 22/09/2003 concluded that after 4 years of observation, the Berlin OPC had failed to uncover infonnation that would justify the continued use of intrusive methods. However. the observation of Scientology activities through other means (e.g., open sources or electronic surveillance) was not affected by the ruling, which applies only to the city-state of Berlin. Observation is not an investigation into criminal wrongdoing. and, no criminal charges had been brought against the Church of Scientology by the Govemment at the end of the period covered by this report.

The Federal OPC's annual reports for 2000 and 2001 concluded that the original reasons for initiating observation of Scientology in 1997 still As in earlier the OPC based its analysis and conclusions on the writings of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard and on Scientology books and pamphlets. The reports noted first that the ideas contained in Hubbard's writings are for Scientology practitioners "binding and unalterable.:The reports that Scientology poses a threat to democratic constitutional order because it advocates replacement of parliamentary democracies by an undemocratic system of govemment based on principles of Scientology; it advocatesa diminution of basic rights'ofthe person for persons not judged "worthy" by Scientology's criteria; it employs an intelligence service that is not supposed to be constrained by existing laws; and it has the long-term goal of replacing the existing -political system through the expansion of Sciento(ogy.

Government authorities contend that Scientology is not a religion but an economic enterprise and therefore 'sometimes have sought to deregister Scientology organizations previously registered as nonprofit associations and require the-m to register as commercial enterprises. With the exception of Dianetik e.V., a Scientology-related organization in Baden-Wuerttemberg, no Scientologyorganization has tax-exempt status. Authorities in the state government have attempted to have the tax-exempt status of Dianetik eV. revoked; however, in January 2002, the State Administrative Court ruled that the organization may retain its tax-exempt status. State officials may appeal the verdict.

Scientologists reported employment difficulties. and, in the state of Bavaria. applicants for state civil service positions must complete questionnaires detailing.any relationship they may have with Scientology. Bavaria identified some state employees as Sclentologists and has required them to complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire specifically states that the failure to complete the fonn will result in the employment application not being considered. Some of these employees have refused, and two filed in the local administrative court. In November 2002, both cases were decided in favor of the employees. Others refused to complete the questionnaire and chose to wait for rulings in the two cases. The Bavarian Interior Ministry commented that these were individual decisions. but withdrew the questionnaire for persons already employed with the State of Bavaria or the City of Munich; however, the questionnaire still was in use for persons seeking new state or munlclpalqovemment employment. In one case, a person was not given civil service but only employee status (a distinction that involves important differences in levels of benefits); in another case, a person quit Scientologyin order not to jeopardize his career. According to Bavarian and federal officials. no one in Bavaria lost a job or was denied employment solely because of association with Scientology; Scientology officials confirmed this fact.

In a well-publicized court case in 1999, a higher social .court in Rheinland-Pfalz ruled that a Scientologist was allowed to run her au pair agency, for which the state labor ministry had refused to renew her license in 1994, solely based on her Scientology membersh ip. The judge ruled that the question of a person's reliability hinges on the person herself and not on her membership in the Church of ScientoJogy. However, the State Labor Office appealed the decision. and the National Social Court in Kassel overturned it. In September 2001, responding to an appeal by the Scientologist, the State Social Court upheld the Kassel http://www.state.gov/g/drVrls/irf/2002/13936.htm 22/09/2003 _ ------

court's finding, ruled out further appeals, and barred the woman from running the au pair agency.

In 2002 the Baden-Wuerttemberg Administrative Court ruled that members of the Scientology Organization are not permitted to sell books and brochures in pedestrian zones in the cities of Stuttgart and Freiburg. The court noted that such activity required a permit for which the Scientoiogy Organization never applied. The Scientology Organization argued that this restriction violated the basic right of religious freedom, but this argument was rejected by the court.

The interministerial group of midlevel federal and state officials that exchanges information on Scientology related issues continued its periodic meetings. The group published no report or policy compendium during the period covered by this report purely consultative in purpose.

In June 2001, the Baden-Wuerttemburg State Administrative Court upheld a 1998 ban on Muslim teachers wearing headscarves in the classroom. An appeal was pending at the end of the period covered by this report. The Administrative Court in Lueneburg, Lower Saxony, found that school authorities have to admit .the teacher into probationary civil service status, and that wearing a headscarf does not constitute cause for denial of employment. An administrative court in Hamburg had cometo a similar finding in 1999. The woman appealed the ruling, and in June 2001, the State Administrative Court dismissed her appeal. It is not clear yet whether she plans to appeal the verdict at the federal level.

In March 2002, the DeMoss Fondation used celebrities to advertise an Evangelical Christian textbook, "Power for Living," which generated approXimately 50,000 requests for the free publication. The Government banned the organization's television and radio broadcasts, as well as billboards, based upon its prohibition of broadcast advertising for religious, political, or ideological causes.

Difficulties sometimes arise between churches and state over tax matters and zoning approval for building places of worship.

There were no reports ofreligious prisoners or detainees.

Forced Religious Conversion

There were no reports of forced religious conversion, including of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, or of the refusal to allow such citizens to be returned to the United States.

Section Ill. Societal Attitudes

The country increasingly is becoming secular. Regular attendance at religious services is decreasing. After more than 4 decades of Communist rule, the eastern part of the country had become far more secular than the western part. Church representatives note that only 5 to 10 percent of eastem inhabitants belong to a religious organization.

Relations between the various religious communities are generally amicable. However, following a rise in the incidence of anti-Semitic crimes and an increase in public criticism of Israeli.Government's actions in the Middle East, Jewish community leaders expressed disappointment in the leaders other religious communities, as well as in some local and national politicians, for not speaking out more forcefully against anti-Semltlsrn. In addition, several Jewish groups accused the media of pro-Palestinian bias in their reporting of the situation in the Middle East, and expressed concern that this alleged bias could increase anti-Semitic attitudes. In October 2001, the management of a commercial racing track in Oschersleben informed the foreign subsidiary of the California Superbike School-a private firm-that it could not rent the track to conduct a training session; they stated that the denial was based on the grounds that the founder of the School was a Scientologist, and that Scientology was under OPC observation.

With an estimated 4 million adherents, Islam is the 3rd most commonly practiced religion in the country (after Catholicism and Lutheranism). All branches Islam are represented, with the vast majority of Muslims coming from a large number of other countries. At times this led to societal discord, such as local resistance to the construction of mosques or disagreements over whether Muslims may use loudspeakers in residential neighborhoods to call the faithful to prayer. There also remain areas where the law conflicts with Islamic practices or raises religious freedom issues. In 2000 the Government published a . comprehensive report on "Islam in Germany" that examined these issues in response to an inquiry frorn Parliament. In June 2002, the Federal Interior Ministry organized the "Forum Islam" in Frankfurt in order to foster diafog among Muslim communities and between these communities and the federal Government.

In the past, opposition to the construction of mosques was reported in various communities around the country. There was no further discussion of the dispute in Heslach regarding the construction of a mosque.

http://www.state.gov/g/drllrls/irfi.2002/13936.htm 22/09/2003 ------

There also was a case of a planned mosque in the Frankfurtsuburb of Roedelheim. Neighbors expressed concernsabout an increasein traffic if visitors come to attend services at the mosque.There were newspaperreports of open oppositionto the project voiced at citizen meetingswith the city administration. Leading city officials seemto supportthe construction of the mosque,butthe case was pendingat the end of the period covered. by this report.

In October2001, two youngmen of Arab origin were convictedof aggravated arson in association with an attackon a synagoguein DOsseldorf that month,which caused slight damageto the building. Police found Nazi symbolsand relateditems in the suspects'homes.The synagogue remained under around-the-clock police protectionsincethe incident at the end of the periodcovered by this report.

In 2000, an explosivedevice detonatedat a DOsseldorf train station, injuring 10 persons, most of whomwere Jewish refugees from the former Soviet Union. Despite intensivepolice investigation,the case, which authoritiesconsidered a possiblehate crime, had not been solved by the end of the period covered by this report.

Section IV. U.S. Government Policy

The U.S. Govemmentdiscusses religiousfreedom with the Govemmentin the contextof its overan dialog and policy of promoting humanrights.

In response to anti-Semitic crimes, members of the U.S. Missioncloselyfollowed the Govemment's responses and officiallyexpressedthe U.S. oppositionto anti-Semitism. Missionofficers maintained contactswith Jewish groups and continueto monitorcloselythe incidenceof anti-Semitic activity.

statusof Scientology was the subjectof many discussions during the period coveredby this report. The U.S. Govemmentexpressed its concems over infringementof individual rights becauseof religious affiliation and over the potentialfor discrimination in intemationaltrade posed-bythe screeningof foreign firms for possible Scientology affiliation.U.S. Govemmentofficials discussed with state and authorities U.S. concemsabout the violation of individualrights posed by the use of declarationsof Scientology affiliation. frequently made the point that the use of such "filters" to prevent personsfrom practicing their professions, solely based on their beliefs,is an abuse of their rights, as well as a discriminatory businesspractice.The U.S. Govemmentconsistently maintainedthat the determination of whetherany organization is religious is for the organization itself to make.

Released on October 7, 2002

Intemational ReligiousFreedomReport Home Page

This site is managed by the Bureau of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of State. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

http://www.state.gov/g/drIJrls/irf/2002/13936.htm 22/09/2003 RE: Church ofScientology Page 1 of 1

From: Sent: 08 October 2003 18:55 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Church of Scientology

A short note form our Embassy in Berlin:

Scientology is not recognised as a church in Germany. Which means a) they do not enjoy the tax-exempt status ofa church (nor as a charity) b) they cannot teach religious education in schools c) chaplains in prisons, hospitals, and the military is a slightly more complex matter. Permission to offer spiritual counselling in said institutions does not formally depend on recognition as a religion or the organisational form ofan "institution under to public law" (the formal status ofthe Catholic and Protestant Churches) but is granted by the responsible denartments of government. For example, there is no formal Islamic "church" (in the above sense)in Germany, but

Yours,

16110/03 , Internanonai r .••

[Print Friendly Version)

France

International Religious Freedom Report 2002 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice; however, religious groups continued to be concerned about the possible impact of legislation passed in 2001. The 1905 law on the separation of church and state prohibits discrimination on the basis .

was no overall change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report.

The generally amicable relationship among religions in society contributed to religious freedom; during the period covered by this report. numerous anti-Semitic incidents occurred, mainly as a result of increased tensions in the Middle East. Government leaders and representatives from the country's four main religious groups stronglycriticized the violence, and the Government continued to increase police security for Jewish institutions.

The U.S. Govemment discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Section I. Religious Demography

The country has a total area of 211,210 square miles, and its populationis approximately 60 million .

The Government does not keep statistics on religious affiliation. The vast majority of the population is nominally Roman Catholic. According to one memberofthe Catholic hierarchy, only 8 percent of the population are practicing Catholics. Muslims constitute the second largest religious group in number; Islam has approximately 4 to 5 million adherents, or approximately 7 to 8 percentof the population. Protestants make up 2 percent of the population . and the Jewish and Buddhist faiths each representt percent.

The Jewish community numbers between 600,000 and 700,000 persons and is divided among Reform. Conservative, and Orthodox groups. According to press reports; up to 60 percent the Jewish community celebrates at most only the high holy days such as Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah. One Jewish commun ity leader has reported that the largest number of practicing Jews in the country is Orthodox. Jehovah's Witnesses claim that 250,000 persons attend their services either regularly or periodically. Orthodox Christians number between 80,000 and 100,000; the vast majority are associated with the Greek or Russian Orthodox churches. According to various estimates, approximately 6 percent of the country's citizens are unaffiliated with any religion.

Other religions present in the country include evangelicals and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons). Membership in evangelical churches is growing 'due to increased participation by African and Antillian immigrants. Examples of minority religious groups include (membership estimates range from 5,000 to 20,000), the Raelians with approximately 20.000 members, , the Solar Temple.

Foreign missionaries are present in the country.

Section 11. Status of Religious Freedom

http://v.ww.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13938.htm 15/08/2003 LegallPolicy Framework

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion and the Govemment generally respects this right in practice: however, groups continued to be concerned about the possible impact of legislation passed in 2001. The 1905 law on the separation of church and state-the foundation of existing legislation on religious freedom-makes it to discriminate on the basis of faith.

Organizations are required to register, and the Government uses many to describe associations. Two of these categories apply to religiousgroups: "Associations cultuelles" (associations of worship , which are exemptfrom taxes) and "associations culturelles" (cultural associations, which are not exempt from taxes). Associations two categories SUbjectto certain management and financial disclosure requirements. An association of worship may organize only religious activities, defined as liturgical services and practices. A cultural association is a type of association whose goal is to promote the culture of a certain group, including a religious group. Although a cultural association is not exempt from taxes, it may receive government subsidies for its cultural and educational operations (such as schools). 'Religious groups normally use both of these categories: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for example, runs strictly religious activities through its association of worship operates a school under its cultural association.

Religious groups must apply'with the local prefecture to be recognized as an association of worship and, therefore, receive tax-exempt status for their religious activities under the 1905 statute. The prefecture reviews the submitted documentation regarding the association's purpose for existence. To qualify the group's purpose must be solely the practice of some form of religious ritual. Printing publications, employing a board president, or running a school may disqualify a group from receiving tax-exempt status.

According to the Ministry of the Interior, 109 of 1,138 Protestant associations, 15 of 147 Jewish associations, and 2 of 1,050 Muslim associations have tax-free status. Roughly 100 Catholic associations are tax exempt; a representative of the Ministry of Interior reports that the total number of non-tax-exempt Catholic associations is too numerous to estimate accurately. More than 50 associations of the Jehovah's Witnesses have tax-free status.

According to the 1905 law, associations of worship are not on the donations that they receive. However, the prefecture may decide to review a group's status if the association receives a large donation or legacy that comes to the attention of the tax authorities. If the prefecture determines that the association is not in factin conformity with the 1905 law, its status may be changed and it may be required to pay a 60 percent tax rate on .present and past donations.

For historical reasons, the Jewish, Reformed (Protestant), and Roman Catholic groups in three departments of Alsace Lorraine enjoy special legal status in terms of taxation of individuals donating to these religious groups. Adherents of these four religious groups may choose to have a portion of their income tax allocated to their church in a system administered by the central Government.

Central or local govemments own and maintain religious buildings constructed before the 1905 law separating church and state. In Alsace and Moselle, special laws allow the local government to provide support for the building ofreligious edifices. The Government partially funded the establishment of the country's oldest Islamic house of worship, the Paris mosque, in 1926. .

Foreign missionaries must obtain a 3-month tourist visa before leaving their own country. Upon arrival, missionaries must apply with the local prefecture for a carte de sejour (a document that allows a foreigner to remain in the country for a given period of time), and then provide the prefecture a letterfrom their sponsoring religious organization.

Religion is not taught in public schools. Parents may home-school children for religious reasons, but all schooling must conform to the standards established for public schools. Public schools make an effort to supply special meals for students with religious dietary restrictions. The State subsidizes private schools, inclUding those that are affiliated with churches.

Five of the country's 10 national holidays are Catholic holidays.

In February 2002, the Government and the Vatican initiated church-state meetings that are expected to focus on administrative and judicial matters. .

The Government has made efforts to promote interfaith understanding. Strict antidefarnatlon laws prohibit racially or religiously motivated attacks. The Government has programs to combat racism and anti Semitism through public awareness campaigns, and by encouraging dialog between local officials, police, and citizen groups. Following the numerous anti-Semitic incidents that occurred during the period covered by report, government leaders. along with representatives from the Jewish community, the Paris and

http ://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irfl2002113938.htm 15108/2003 Marseille Grand Mosques, the Protestant Federation, and the French Conference on Bishops, came together to criticize the violence.

Restrictions on ReligiousFreedom

Following mass suicides in 1994 by members of the Order of the Solar Temple, successive governments have encouraged pUblic caution towards some minority religious groups that it may consider to be "cults." In 1996 a parliamentary commission studying so-called cults issued a report that identified 173 groups as cults, including Jehovah's Witnesses, the Theological Institute of Nimes (an evangelical Christian Bible College), and the Church of Scientology. The Government has not banned any of the groups on the list; however, members of some of the listed have alleged instances of intolerance due to the ensuing publicity.

The Government's "Interministerial Mission in the Fight against Sects/Cults" (MILS), which was created in 1998, is responsible for coordinating periodicinterministerial meetings at which government officials can "exchange information on cults and coordinate their actions. Although the Government instructed the MILS to analyze the "phenomenon of cults," its decree did not define the term cult or distinguish cults from religions. On February 19, 2002, the MILS released its third annual report. The report noted a stagnation in cult activities in the country but stated that disasters may provide enhanced opportunity for cult recruitment of potentially vulnerable victims. A separate case study focused on potential cult activities in the health care field. On June 17,2002, the President of MILS resigned; no replacement had been named as of the end of the period covered by this report.

The June 2001 About-Picard law, Which tightens restrictions on organizations, does not define cults; however, its articles list criminal activities a religious association (or other legal entity) could be subject to dissolution. These include: endangering life or the physical or psychological well-being of a person; placing minors at mortal risk; violation of another person's freedom, dignity, or identity; the illegal practice of medicine or pharmacology; false advertising; and fraud or falsffications. Certain registered private associations, including anti-cult associations, are given standing as third parties to initiate crirninal action on behalf of alleged victims against a "person or organization that has the goal or effect of creating or exploiting a psychological or physical dependence." The law also reinforces existing provisions of1he Penal Code by adding language covering the exploitation of the "psychological or physical subjection" of "fraudulent abuse of a state of ignorance or weakness." Leaders the four major religions, such as the president of the French Protestant Federation and the president of the Conference of Bishops in France, raised concerns about legislation. By the end of the period.covered by this report, no cases had been brought under the new law.

In April 2001, the Paris branch of the Church of Scientology was taken to court for attempted fraud, false advertising, and violation of the Data Privacy Act. The case was brought by three persons, including a former member of the group, who that they continued to receive mass mailings despite requests to be taken off lists. According to press reports, the prosecutor requested that the court consider dissolving the church in Paris; however, there was no legal request for dissolution. On May 17, 2002, the court found the Paris branch gUilty of violating the privacy of former members and fined them approximately $8,000 (8,000 Euros); however, the branch was cleared of attempted fraud and false advertising. The court fined the president of the lle-de-France section of the organization approximately $2,000 (2,000 Euros). Church of Scientology representatives report that a case filed by a parent whose child attended an "Applied Scholastics"-based school remained ongoing.

Local authorities often determine the treatment of religious minorities. The Association of the Triumphant Vajra was involved in a dispute with local officials over a statue of the Association's guru allegedly was erected without a permit. After a final court ruling, the statue was demolished on September 6, 2001.

Some observers are concerned about the scrutiny with which tax authoritleshave examined the financial records of some religious groups. The Witnesses or the Church of qualifying religious associations for tax therefore on all funds they The tax authorities began an audit in the French of Jehovah's Witnesses. In 1998 the tax authorities formally assessed the 60 percent tax on donations received between September 1992 and August 1996. Tax authorities then began proceedings to collect the assessed tax, including steps to place a lien on the property of the National Consistory of Jehovah's Witnesses. On February 28, 2002, the Versailles Court of Appeals upheld a Nanterre court's 2000 decision against the Jehovah's Witnesses. The Jehovah's Witnesses were appealing the decision to the Court of Cassation (the country's highest appeal body) at the end of the period covered by this report.

Debate continues over whether denying some Muslim girls the right to wear headscarves in public schools constitutes a violation of the right to religious freedom. Various courts and government bodies have considered the question on a case-by-case basis; however, there has been no definitive national decision on this issue. .

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13938.htrn 15/08/2003 ... ------

There were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees.

Forced Religious Conversion

There were no reports of forced religious conversion, induding of minor U.S. citizens who had been abducted or illegally removed from the United States, or of the refusalto allow such citizens to be returned to the United States.

Section Ill. Societal Attitudes

generally amicable relationshipamong religions in society contributed to religious freedom: however, there were a number of anti-Semitic incidents during the period covered by this report.

The Conseil des Eglises Chretiens en France is composed of three Protestant, three Catholic, and three . Orthodox Christian representatives. It serves as a foruin for dialog among the major Christian churches. There is also an organized interfaith dialog among the Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish communities, which discuss and issue statements on various national and international themes. The Ministry of Interior is consulting with Muslim organizations regarding the creation of a Muslim council and is working to schedule a vote on an accord.

The annual National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (NCCHR) report on racism and xenophobia, released in March 2002, noted a decrease in the number of attacks against Jews in 2001, following increase in incidents in 2000. The NCCHR reported 200 anti-Semitic incidents of violence and threats in 2001, compared with 743 in 2000. However, during the first 6 months of 2002, there was another increase in attacks, ranging from graffiti and harassment to cemetery desecration and firebombing, mainly as a result ofincreasing tensions in the Middle East. According to the press, the police reported close to 400 incidents during the 2-week period of March 29 through April 17, 2002. The most serious incidents occurred over the Easter-Passover weekend: On March 30, a synagogue was damaged by fire in a suburb of Strasbourg: on March 31, a synagogue and adjoining library in Marseille were burned to the ground and a second was attacked 2 days later; inMarch in Toulouse, there a drive-by shooting of a Kosher butcher shop; on April 7, assailants threw gasoline bombs at a synagogue north of Paris; and in April in Lyon, 15 masked assailants smashed 2 cars into a synagogue and set it on fire. On April 10, a group of youths armed with baseball bats attacked and robbed Jewish soccer players. It appeared that youths were responsible for many of the incidents and arrests have been made. Government leaders, members of the Jewish community, the Paris and Marseille Grand Mosques, the Protestant Federation, and the French Conference of Bishops strongly criticized the violence.

The Government increased security for Jewish institutions. More 13 mobile units, totaling more than 1,200 officers, have been assigned to those locales having the largest Jewish communities. Fixed or mobile police are present in the schools, particularly during the hours when children are entering or leaving school buildings. All of these measures were coordinated closely with leaders of the Jewish communities in the country, the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions (CRIF). In April 2002, the Marseille prefecture instituted patrols at all of the city's Jewish sites.

In addition, several incidents occurred against members of the large community, including incidents of harassment and vandalism.

In April 2001, the press reported that software produced by Panda International was created by a I Scientologist. According to representatives of Panda Software, the Interior Ministry and others \ subsequently indicated they would not renew their contracts with the company. Panda daimed that critical statements by govemment officials in press artides linking the product to Scientology have caused a significant loss of business.

Section IV. U.S. Government Policy

The U.S. Government discusses religious freedom issues with the Government in the context of its overall dialog and policy of promoting human rights.

Representatives from the Embassy have met several times with government officials and members of Parliament. Embassy officers also meet regularly with a variety of private citizens, religious organizations, and nongovemmental organizations involved in the issue. U.S. Members Congress and Congressional Commissions also have discussed religious freedom issues with senior government officials. In April 2002. National Trade Estimate on Foreign Trade Barriers cited France on the grounds that "a U.S. software alleges that French government agencies have refused to renew contracts with the firm because .i.of the management's relationship to Scientology."

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rIs/irf/2002/13938.htm 15/08/2003 ------

Released on October 7, 2002

International Religious Freedom Report Home Page

This site is managed by the Bureau of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of State. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13938.htm 15/08/2003 France's Bill could hinder Religious Freedom Religious Minorities Can be Accused of by Willy Fautre ("Worthy News ," July 20, 2000)

BRUSSELS, Belgium (Compass) The French National Assembly has adopted Europe's toughest anti-cult legislation, which would create a controversial new crime of "mental manipulation" punishable by a maximum [me of $75,000 and five imprisonment. Christian concerned about the bill's possible consequences....

The new anti-cult bill dated May 30 and unveiled on June 6 was authored by Member of Parliament Catherine Picard and signed by all French Socialist members of the National Assembly. It went through the Law Commission on June 21 and was voted on the next day in the National Assembly. It must now go back to the Senate for approval of the latest amendments. The Senate approved a less stringent bill last December.

The bill, which contains 11 articles, represents the latest effort to pass repressive legislation against minority religions.

In 1996, the French government published a list of 173 "dangerous sects" that included an evangelical church with connections with Baptists in the United States, as well as Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientologists.

Article 1 of the Assembly bill provides for the dissolution ofa corporation or association whose activities "have the goal or effect to create or to exploit the state of mental or physical dependence of people who are participating in its activities" and which infringe on "human rights and fundamental liberties," when this association, or its managers (or de facto managers) have been convicted "several times" for offenses such as fraud, illegal practice of medicine, and several other criminal offenses.

Article 6 bans sects from advertising and prohibits them from opening missions or looking for new members within a perimeter of 200 meters from a hospital, a retirement home, a public or private institution of prevention, curing or caring, or school for two to 18-year-old students. Violation can bring a sentence of two years imprisonment and $30,000 [me.

Article 8 punishes any promotion or propaganda by an association group falling under Article 1 "intended for young people" (age not defined) under penalty of a $7,500 fine, applicable to both individuals and associations.

Article 9 establishes the new crime of "mental manipulation." Mental manipulationis defined as any activity or activities "with the goal or the effect to create or to exploit a state of psychological or physical dependence of people who are participating in the group's activities, to exercise on one ofthese people repeated and serious pressure and to use patent techniques to change the person's judgement in order to lead this person, against his or her will or not, to an act or an abstention which is heavily prejudicial to him/her." The penalty is three years of imprisonment and a [me of $40,000.

If the victim is considered particularly weak due to his or her age, illness, etc., the penalty is five years imprisonment and a $75,000 fine . ...

http://hss.fullerton.edu/comparative/france_articles_p2.html 15/08/2003 Church of Scientology Page 1 of4

From: Sent: 10 October 2003 10:38 To:

Cc: Subject: RE: Church of Scientolog{ Importance: High

Please find attached some telegrams that were received from Paris in 2001 reporting on new French legislation on cults.

France has the toughest anti-cult legislation in the EU. The "mission interrninisterielle et de lutte contre les derives sectaires" still exists and reports directly to the Prime Minister. It has classed the Church ofScientology as a sect, not a religion.

Hope this is ofsome use.

Tel: : Fax: ,

www .fco.gov.uk

-----Original Message---- From : Sent: 08 October 2003 10:30 To: Cc:

Subject: RE: Church ofScientology Importance: High

Hello '

Thank you for getting back to us is away 00 a course today and given that we have to prepare a draft written statement by 4 pm this Friday for the Treasury solicitor and counsel, I am taking the liberty ofprogressing this a little further.

16/10/03 -. .

FROM

TO cc: Chanceries as above

SUBJECT: FRENCH ANTI-CULT LEGISLATION: MORE DETAILS

SUMMARY

1. Summary of mainpoints of anti-cult legislation voted on 30 May. Some opposition from heads of Protestant and Catholic churches but littlecomment in the press. No signoflegal challenges to the new law. The Frenchseem relaxed.

DETAIL

2. Following FCO telno 164, HongKong telno 122 and our conversation on 5 JuneI enclose further details of the new French law.

2. Aftertwo readings in the Senate (November 1998 and earlyMay 2001) andtwo in the National Assembly (June 2000 and lateMay2001) France voted its new anti-cult legislation on 30 May. Thenew law addresses fourmainissues:

- Legal dissolution of sects;

A French courtwill nowbe ableto orderthe dissolution of a sect if it or.itsleaders havebeenfound guilty of harming people, of illegally practising pharmacy or medicine, of misleading advertising or fraud. In this context a sect is defined as an organisation which"creates" or "exploits" the "physical or psychological dependence" ofits members.

- Fraudulent abuseof a stateof ignorance or weakness;

Thisoffence willnow bepunishable by a FF 2 500 000 fine andthree imprisonment. Itwillfacilitate theprosecution of "charismatic leaders" accused of forcing vulnerable peopleto "an actor absence of an act". "Vulnerable" people are minors or those "in a stateofphysical or psychological dependence resulting from "pressure" or "judgement-altering techniques". Parliament finally rejected the ideaof the creation of an offence of "mental manipulation" whichthe deputies had favoured during the bill's firstreading inthe Assembly.

- Promotion ofsects;

Thepromotion to youngpeopleof a sectwhichhas previously been guilty in a courtwillbe punishable by a FP 50 000 fine.

- Prosecution of sects;

Officially recognised anti-cult associations willnow be ableto takesects to court.

opposmON

3. Therehasbeensomeopposition to the legislation although it has notreceived muchpresscoverage:

- TheInternational Federation of Helsinki forHumanRights . criticised the new legislation on 31 May for "endangering religious tolerance andthe fundamental freedom at the heartof French political values";

- The Catholic andProtestant churches in France alsocontinue to havereservations, although recognising thatthetext has been altered significantly since 1998. On 15Maythe President of the Conference of French bishops andthe head of the FrenchProtestant Federation wroteto the PrimeMinister. In their opinion the new lawranthe riskof "damaging fundamental freedoms";

- TheChurchofScientology(COS) heldan informal pressconference on 30 May. It denounced the new legislation as a "lawof exception" and that it wasthe product of a handful of extremists aiming to enforce stateatheism. On 29Maythe CoS demonstrated in front ofthe FrenchEmbassy in London. Under thenewlegislation, the CoS willbe liablefor dissolution following theprosecution ofseveral of itsmembers for fraud.

4. has beenno signinthepress thatanyofthe mentioned intending to mount a legal challenge to the new law. It might be useful to checkwithLegal Advisers whether theywould beentitled to takea caseto the .European Courtof Human Rights. Thelawwasscrutinised bythe National Consultative Committee onHuman Rights as partof theusual legislative process. Itwasthe Consultative Committee which advised against the use of theterm"mental manipulation" before the bill's secondreadinginthe Senate.

MEDIA REACTIONS

5. Liberation (centre-left) andFigaro (centre-right) published articles on 31 May. Bothpapers commented that ithadbeena "consensual" billvotedby allpolitical groups withthe exception of onecentre-right deputy (thetexthaving beenprepared and presented by a rightwingSenator anda left-wing deputy). Both papers pickedup on thereservations of the Catholic andProtestant churches. The toneof botharticles waspositive: theFrench parliament votedthrough a tough andground-breaking lawputting France at the forefront of anti-sect legislators.

COMMENT

6. Public opinion appears generally relaxed about itsnew, tough legislation. TheFrenchmedia didmostof itssoul-searching a year ago whenthe textwas shooting between Senate andNational Assembly andCatholic andProtestant churches wereat theirmost vocal. . Noises of dissent fromtraditional church representatives as well as the Church of Scientology were expected andleftparliamentarians unmoved. Earlyconsensus between LeftandRighthelped to give the billan easyrideoncetheproblematic "mental manipulation" term wasremoved. Socialist deputy Philippe Vuilque commented during the :final reading "weare disturbing sects andstopping themfrom developing theirlucrative business; theyare furious andwe are delighted thattheyarefurious!"

Signed: SUBJECT: FRANCE: LEGISLAnON AGAINST CULTS

SUMMARY

1. Information on the French government's legislation against cults. DETAIL . 2. Publichostility towards sectshas beengrowing in France for the pasttwentyyears andhas beenreinforced by a wideranti-US movement. Cases involving sectsbeingbrought to courthave increased since 1994 whenFrench lawwas changed making it possible to prosecute corporate bodies (personnes morales) in the same way as individuals. The MILS (Interministerial action group on Sects) is the Government body actively involved. It was setup in 1998 and reports straightto the Prime Minister.

3. The Senate decided in 1999 to update a lawfrom 1936 aimed at dissolving groups possessing "military or surveillance teams". In practice, the law hadproved inadequate forprosecuting sects, especially since it couldonlybe invoked aftera decision takenin the Council of Ministers. New draft legislation wasvotedthrough the Senate in December 1999.

4. TheNational Assembly modified the Senate's draftbill quite considerably in June 2000 before votingit unanimously. Thedraft legislation as it now stands proposes: - the creation of a crime of "mental manipulation" (FF300,000 fine and 3 years in prison). Thisis the most significant and controversial proposal in legislative terms andprovoked an outcry, including from the Protestant Church. Thetext criminalises "a group pursuingactivities withthe aim or effectof exploiting the psychological or physical dependence or persons participating in its activities, putting severe pressure on thosepersons andreiterating or usingtechniques designed to altertheirjudgement in orderto make them, with or without their consent, commit an act which causes harm". TheNational Consultative Commission Human Rights was consulted on the acceptability ofthe proposal andgaveits green light; - that sects committing morethan two offences should be forcibly dissolved. Existing offenders wouldbe forbidden from operating in the neighbourhood of schools, hospitals, rest homes andareas housing "vulnerable people". The legislation would enable local authorities to refuse planning permission to sects already having committed an offence. There wouldalso be a fine(FF50,000) for previously convicted sectsdistributing promotional material to youngpeople; - that the legal responsibility of corporate bodiesbe extended, enabling themto be prosecuted for: fraud andmisleading advertising; voluntary damage to aperson's life;actsof torture and barbarity; violence; threats; rape and othersexual attacks; failing to help a personin danger; provoking a suicide; degrading the image of the dead; abandoning a family; endangering the life of a minorand the illegal practice of medicine or pharmacy (FFlOO,OOO . fineandoneyearimprisonment).

5. If adopted in itspresent fonnthe billwould give France the toughest anti-sect legislation in Europe. Thedraft wassupposed to return to the Senate earlythis year, butwas removed fromthe timetable in January through lackof time before municipal elections. Thedateof the Senate's second reading willbe known after a meeting on 5 April.

(Contact: e-mail) RE: Church ofScientology Page 1 of7

From: Sent: 16 October 2003 14:50 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Church of Scientology

Regards

Tel: .

-----Original Message---- From: Sent: 16 October 2003 11:47 ce.r Subject: RE: Church ofScientology

. passed your query on to me. I followed the dealings ofthe Church ofScientology in France quite closely two or three years ago when they were under investigation in several cases. Here is what I have on the case from early 2002:

COURT RULLING OF ITMARCH 2002

On 17 March 2002 the Parisian unit ofthe Church ofScientology (known as the "Spiritual Association ofthe Church of Scientology for the Ile de France region") was found guilty ofinfringing the data protection law ("loi informatique et libertes") by the Tribunal Correctionnel (Magistrates' Court which deals with criminal matters)and fmed 8.000 euros. The President ofthe Association was filled 2.000 euros, The Association and its President had appeared before the court on 21 and 22 February on charges ofmisleading advertising, fraud and infringement ofthe data protection law following complaints from members ofthe public that they were continuing to receive unsolicited letters from the Association.

This was the first time the Tribunal Correctionnel had found a legal entity ("personne morale") guilty ofa crime in its own right. Individual members ofthe Church had previously been found guilty before the same court on other charges. In his summing up, the Public Prosecutor spoke ofthe possiblity (without referring to it explicitly) ofthe dissolution ofthe Association.

BACKGROUND

16/10/03 Church ofScientology Page 2 of7

The "Spiritual Association ofthe Church ofScientology for the ne de France region" (Asesif) was born from the ashes ofthe Church ofScientology in 1995 after it was put in compulsory liquidation by the French State for unpaid taxes. This was the conclusion ofa 14 year battle during which the Church of Scientology maintained thatit should be exempt from paying tax since it was officially a "Religion". The Church ofScientology had obtained official "Religion" status in the USA in 1993 and had shortly thereafter begun to campaign throughout the world for the same status and accompanying privileges.

Source for the above information: Agesce France Press from May 2002.

I hope this is useful for your submission. Please do not hesitate to come back to me with any other questions.

-----Original Message---- From: Sent: 14 October 2003 14:05 To: Subject: RE: Church ofScientology Importance: High

Hello , I have a further query for you, please could you help. We have identified a case reported by Jon Henley in the Guardian (21st February, 2002) where Scientology was being taken to court by the French governmentas a legal entity in its own right. Is it possible to find out the outcome of

Many thanks

16110/03 29/09/03

NOTE ON SCIENTOLOGY

This note summarises the status of scientology in other countries; the arguments for denying it religious status expounded by some academics; and criticisms of the organisation, which, if supported by evidence and proven to be systemic may justify differences in the treatment of scientology in comparison to other -religions. Where references are given to numbers, they refer to the accompanying bundle. _ . A The status of seientology in other eountries

Germany

(i) Early 80s American Court case in which 11 top ScientDlogists were convicted for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break .into government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting. _(ii) 1994 case in which the US Supreme Court upheld a -California court's finding of substantial evidence that Scientology practices took place in a coercive environment. (Hi) September 1997 case in which the Illinois Supreme Court found thatthere was enough evidence to allege that ScientoJogy had driven the Cult Awareness Network -into bankruptcy by filing 21 lawsuits in a 17-month period (the Scientology organisation has now taken over its website). (iv) A New York Times article outlining a campaign by Scientology against the IRS and people who work there e.g. hiring private investigators to dig into the private lives of IRS officials. Earlier IRS refusals to grant tax exemption to Scientology had been upheld by every and it was only following this that the IRS decided to grant tax-emption, A Wall Street Journal article outlined details of a $12.5 million tax settlement between the IRS and Scientology, including the Scientology agreement to drop thousands of lawsuits the IRS. (v) !n 1996 Courts in Lyon convicted several leading Scientoloqlsts of involuntary manslaughter and fraud in a case where methods taught by Scientology were found to have driven a person to suicide. (vi) Usa McPherson's death ; (vii) Scientology records seized in an FBI raid on church offices proving that "Scientology had come to Clearwater with a written plan to take control of the city. 'Government and community organizations were infiltrated by Scientology members" (New York Times) (viii) One of the highest German Courts, the Federal Labour Court ruled in 1995 that the Scientology branch in Hamburg was not a religious congregation, but clearly a commercial enterprise. It also held that Sclentoloqy utilises inhuman and totalitarian practices.

2. The Scientology organisation is currently under observation by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Bavaria requires all applicants for admission to Bavarian public -service to indicate any connections to Scientology and those acknowledging a tie are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. To date Bavaria has not rejected any such applications.

1 Page 1 of 1

From: Sent: 03 October 2003 14:49 To: Cc: Subject: Re: FW: Scientology JR - Heaton case - I am out of the office on Monday, free on Tuesday morning,free on Wednesdayall day.

»> gov.uk> 03/10/03 13:56:37 »> > " > > With regards to the recent submission from .copv below) > has agreed that the Faith Communities Unit should take on this > case. We need to get a draft statement prepared by the end of next week > and would like you to attend a meeting to discussthis. Could you let me > know a.s.a.p, when you are available meet - preferably at the beginning > of the week - so that I can arrange this. > > - non-recognised religions - scientology - 2 October.doc> > > > > > Many thanks > > " > > > Faith Communities unit > Home Office > > > t: I f: > > >

********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please return it to the address it came from telling them it is not and then delete it from your system.

This email messagehas been swept for computer viruses.

********************************************************************** "

********************************************************************** THIS EMAIL ,AND ANY ATTACHMENT, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE ADDRESSEE. ITS UNAUTHORISED USE, DISCLOSURE, STORAGE OR COPYING IS NOT PERMmED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE DESTROY ALL COPIES AND INFORM THE SENDER BY RETURN EMAIL. **********************************************************************

03110/03 From: Sent: 03 October 2003 15:03· To: Subject: RE: Scientology JR - Heaton

Just read your E mail. We spoke. Just to confirm have forwarded some papers to you T Sols. I am out of the in Shrawsburv Mon - Wed next but can be contacted on my mobile or via the Shrewsbury.

-----Originaf Message---- From: Sent: Fncav. October To: Subject: ScientologyJR - Heaton

11 h regards to the recent submission from (copy below) has agreed that the Faith Communities Unit should take onthis case. We need to get a draft statement prepared by the end of next week and would like you to attend a meeting to discuss this. Could you let me know a.s.a.p. when you are available to meet - preferably at the beginning of the week - so that I can arrange this.

- non-recognised religions - scientology - 2 October.doc»

Many thanks

Communities Unit Home Office

I f:

This email message has been swept for computer viruses.

**********************************************************************

1 From: Sent: 02 October 2003 14:32 To: Subject: FW: Non-recognised religions: scientology

Importance: High

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Due By: 06 October 200317:00 Flag Status: Flagged

. non-re cognise d -.- Hello : welcome back. Please can meet on Monday to talk about this. -can you make time for it too and if possible provide me with some background.

Thanks

--Oriainal Messaqe--- From: Sent: 02 October 2003 10:37 To: ubject: FW: Non-recognised religions: scientology

You will need to be aware of this development. I have forwarded it to : and : ' for information. . and you will wish to discuss with - when returns from leave next week.

-Oriqinal Messaqe From: - Sent: 02 October 2003 10:22 To: ' cc religions: scientology

Please see attached note from - non-recognised religions - scientology - 2 October.doc»

1 From: Sent: 09 October 200315:21 To: SUbject: Church of Scientology

Importance: High -.. fyi

--Original From: Sent: 08 October 2003 19:32 , To: . Cc: SUbject: RE: Church of Scientology

Dear

As you know INO does not recognise Scientology as a religion for the purposes of the Immigration Rules. In practice this means that there is no prohibition on scientologists entering the UK in one capacity or another 'ie Rules eg student or visitor and following the doctrines of their belief whilst here. But persons connected with the urganisation are not recognised as "ministers of religion" and do not therefore qualify for admission the specific category of the Rules that enables such persons to enter for permit-free employment as ministers of religion, missionaries members of a religious order. . This has been our position for quite some time and derives from the 1970 Court of Appeal judgement in ex parte Segerdal that held that scientology chapels did not constitute places of religious worship under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1955. This was 'because the ceremonies carried out in the bUilding were focused not on prayer to a Supreme Being but on instruction in a philosophy concerned with man.

We have also taken note of the more recent decision of the Charity Commissioners not to grant charitable status the grounds that they did not agree that Scientology had been established "for the advancement of religion".

As far as information and research the organisation I attach some information from the group INFORM, which is quite informative. INFORM are a NGO who have been very useful in providing research into the backgrounds of religious groups.

Scienlologybrief.doc

I hope this is of help. Please let me know if J can assist further.

Regards,

INPD

Message From: Sent: 08 October 2003 11:02 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Church of Scientology Importance: High

- I am copying to and who will be able to give you the IND position , in full - which is simply derived from the general HO Position as outlined by in his recent note.

-Original Messaae-- From: Sent: 08 October 2003 10:59 To: SUbject: FW: Church of Scientology Importance: High

Hello

returned email indicated that you might be able to deal with my query. I need to talk to someone the problems around Scientology (outlined below), as we are aware that INO have dealt this issue recently. My apologies if I have incorrectly assumed it might be you; if not, please could you indicate who is the right person to talk to about this matter within INO

Many thanks

Faith Communities Unit

Tel:

--Original Messaoe From: Sent: 07 October 2003 17:39 To: Cc: Subject: Church of Scientology Importance: High

Hello

Many thanks

Faith Communities Unit

Tel: Issued Guidance Page 1 of2

Registering a Charity Meeting Our Requirements About Registered Charities Promoting Effective Performance Guidance For Charities About the Charity Commission Publications Strategies, Plans Reports

Home About The Charity Comm ission Printable Version

.Decisions of the Commission

This page contains details of decisions of the Charity Commission which are novel, significant or otherwise of wider interest. A Review is a decision of the Commission carried out under its

All documents are in PDF format. Please Note: ForPDF documents Adobe Acrobat Reader is required, for ..on .

Function Issue Decision Level Sort Of Review rganisation Date Decision

II I lie Charity 05/11/02 Commissioners .Review of a Y Support [scheme Centre for Registration 24/08/01 Commissioners Review of Corporate charitable Accountability status

The Charity Bank Registration 01/11/02 Board of the Decision on N Limited Commissioners charitable ent status Church of Registration 17/11/99 Board of the Decision on N Scientology Commissioners charitable (England and status Wales)

pocument I c

Cylch Registration 04/02 Commissioners " Decisipn on N ment charitable · status Environment Registration 09/05/03 Commissioners Decision on Y Foundation, The charitable status General Medical Registration 02/04/02 Board of the Decision on N Council Commissioners charitable status Guidestar UK Registration 09/05/03 Registration Decision on . N Division charitable status Internet Content Registration 10/12/02 Comm issioners Review of Y Rating charitable Association, The status

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/tcc/issueguide.asp 15/1 0/03 Message Page 1 of3

From: Sent: 15 October 2003 10:00 To: Subject: FW: Home Office request - Church of Scientology

-----Original Message---- From: Sent: 15 October 2003 09:50 To: ce. r. k Subject: riorne ornce request - Church of Scientology

This Dept does not have a stance on whether scientology should be accepted as a religion. . . .

With respect to Religious Education, the regulations state that locally agreed syllabuses for maintained schools must reflect the fact that religious traditions in the country are in the main whilst taking account ofthe teaching and practices ofother principal religions. Although the regulations do not state what these religions are, traditionally they are taken as being Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism. However, it is up to the head teacher and governing body which other faiths and groups pupils will cover as part ofthe RE syllabus.

As far as we can say there are currently 2 independent schools that are described as using the teaching method devised by L Ron Hubbard but only one is owned by the Church of Scientology.

We have recently introduced regulations to allow independent schools to apply for an order made by the SoS designating them as a school with a religious character. This will allow such independent schools to discriminate in favour ofteaching staffwith the same religious beliefas the school. We do not intend to determine what is or is not a religion when we receive these applications and have no prescriptive list of acceptable religious bodies. ..

It is already possible for any group to propose to establish a maintained school with a religious character. For a scientology school to be considered for designation as a faith school, it would first be necessary for scientology to recognised as a faith - which has not been the case.

Happy to discuss

15/10/03 Church ofScientology in Germany Page 1 of 1

From: Sent: 08 October 2003 12:14 To: Cc: Subject: Church of Scientology in Germany . Importance: High

The Home Office have requested any information that we have on the status of the Church of Scientology in Germany. Have the German authorities expressed any suspicions about the Church and its practices? I can find nothing in our files. Do you have anything available? One or two paragraphs would be fine given the tight deadline (cop today).

If you find anything, please send your reply direct to all copy addressees as I may be out of the office later this afternoon.

Thanks,

Foreign and Commonwealth Office +

09/10/03 RE: Church ofScientology Page 1 of2

From: Sent: 07 October 2003 18:34 To: Cc:

Subject: RE: Church of Scientology

Your email belowaskedforGermanlFrenchviewsonthechurchofScientology.Iamnotsurewecanhelp.This is not the sort ofinformation that the FCO or posts would normally have at their fingertips.

You say your deadline is Friday, it is always helpful to know what the information is for and whether the deadline is for any specific reason.

That said, am copying to our posts/desks just in case they do have a view they can share in the time available.

-----Original Message---- From: Sent: 07 October 2003 17:48 To: ' Cc: Subject: Church ofScientology

Can you help? Do you have any information on the practices ofthe Church of Scientology in Germany or France? I know that both countries have suspicions about the Church - do you know what these are and why? Perhaps you could forward this email to any officials (in the FCO or embassies) who you think would be able to provide on this?

I am out ofthe office tomorrow but ifyou have any info then please email it to me (I'm afraid my deadline is Friday!). I'll be back on Thursday so I'll probably call you about this then.

Many thanks

Faith Communities Unit Home Office

t: f:

09110/03 RE: Church ofScientology Page 1 of 1

From: Sent: 08 October 2003 18:55 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Church of Scientology -

A short note form our Embassy in Berlin:

Yours,

Foreign and Commonwealth Office +44

09/10/03

SUMMARY

The Prime Minister asked the Social Exclusion Unit(SEU) to explore with other government departments how to cut rates of re-offending by ex-prisoners. The report setsout the scale of the problem; examines the causes and why the system doesn't work better; and makes recommendations for the way forward.

The report is the result of a wide-ranging consultation by the SEU. This included a written consultation and a series of seminars with practitioners, managers and abroad range of service users both inside and outside the criminal justice field. The report has also been informed by visits the SEU made to over 50 prisons as well as to probation services, voluntary groups, housing, family, drug, health and employment projects to see good practice in action and hear the experiences and views of front line staff and users.

Prison sentences are not succeeding in turning the majority of offenders away from crime. Of those prisoners released in 1997, 58 per cent were convicted of another crime within two years. 36 per cent were back inside on another prison sentence. The system struggles particularly to reform younger offenders. 18-20-year-old male prisoners were reconvicted at a rate of 72 per cent.over the same period; 47 per cent received another prison sentence.

Despite falling in the 1980s, the reconviction rate rose again in the 1990s and has remained obstinately high in recent years. The factors behind this are complex, but it is possible to single out a number of changes over that period which may have contributed: these include an erosion in post-release support for short-term prisoners those sentenced to less than 12 months; a change in benefit rules for prisoners; and the sharp rise in social exclusion, in areassuch aschild poverty, drug use, school exclusion, and inequality.

In fact, the headline reconviction figure masks a far greater problem for public safety. We know, for instance, that of those reconvicted in the two years following release, each will actually have received three further convictions on average. For each reconviction, it is estimated that five recorded offences are committed. At a conservative estimate, released prisoners are responsible for at least 1 million crimes per year -18 per cent of recorded, notifiable crimes. And this takes no account of the amount of unrecorded crime that ex-prisoners, reconvicted or otherwlse.wlll have committed.

Many of the costs of re-offending by ex-prisoners are not quantifiable, but can be devastating and long term, and are frequently felt by the most vulnerable in society. Most obviously, there is the impact on victims, many of whom will be repeat victims, and on their families; also on communities, predominantly the most disadvantaged. In turn, where re-offenders are caught and imprisoned, a heavy toll is taken on their families and on their own lives.

The financial cost of re-offending by ex-prisoners, calculated from the overall costs of crime, is staggering and widely felt. In terms of the cost to the criminal justice system of dealing with the consequences of crime, recorded crime alone committed by ex-prisoners comes to at least £11 billion per year. An ex-prisoner's path back to prison is extremely costly for the criminal justice system. A re-offending ex-prisoner is likely to be responsible for crime costing the criminal justice system an average of £65,000. Prolificoffenders will cost even more. When re-offendinq leads to a further prison sentence, the costs soar. The average cost of a prison sentence imposed at a crown court is roughly £30,500, made up of court and other legal costs. The costs of actually keeping prisoners within prison vary significantly, but average £37,500 per year. -. . And yet costs are only a fraction of the overall cost of re-offending. First, recorded crime accounts for between only a quarter and a tenth of total crime, and ex-prisoners are likely to be prolific offenders. They may, therefore, be responsible for a large proportion of unrecorded crime and its costs as well. Second, there are high financial costs to: the police and the criminal justice system more widely; the victims of the crimes; other public agencies who also have to pick up the pieces; the national economy through toss of income; the communities in which they live; and, of course, prisoners themselves and their families.

There is now considerable evidence the factors that influence re-offending . Building on criminological and social research, the SEU has identified nine key factors:

education;

employment;

drug and alcohol misuse;

mental and physical health;

attitudes and self-control;

institutionalisation and life-skills;

housing;

financial support apd debt; and

family networks.

The evidence shows that these factors can have a huge impact on the likelihood of a prisoner re-offending. For example, being in employment reduces the riskof re-offending by between a third and a half; having stable accommodation reduces the riskby a fifth.

The challenge of turning a convicted offender away from crime is often considerable. Many prisoners have poor skills and little experience of employment, few positive social networks, severe housing problems, and all of this is often severely complicated by drug, alcohol and mental health problems.

Many prisoners have experienced a lifetime of social exclusion. Compared with the general population, prisoners are thirteen times as likely to have been in care as a child, thirteen times as likely to be unemployed, ten times as likely to have been a regular truant, two and a half times as likely to have had a family member convicted of a criminal offence, six times as likely to have been a young father, and fifteen times as likely to be HIV positive.

2 Many prisoners' basic skills are very poor. 80 per cent have the writing skills, 65 per cent the numeracy skills and.50 per cent the reading skills at or below the level of an ll-year-old child. 60 to 70 per cent of prisoners were using drugs before imprisonment. Over 70 per cent suffer from at least two mental disorders. And 20 per cent of male and 37 per cent of female sentenced prisoners have attempted suicide in the past. The position is often even worse for 18-20-year-olds, whose basic skills, unemployment rate and school exclusion background are all over a third worse than those of older •

Despite high levels of need, many prisoners have effectively been excluded from access to services in the past. It is estimated that around half of prisoners had no GP before they came into custody; prisoners are over twenty times more likely than the general population to have been excluded from school ; and one prison drugs project found that although 70 per cent of those entering the prison had a drug misuse . problem, 80 per cent of the se had never had any contact with drug treatment services.

There is considerable risk that a prison sentence might actually make the factors associated with re offending worse. For example, a third lose their house while in prison, two-thirds lose their job, over a fifth face increased financial problems and over two-fifths lose contact with their family. There are also real dangers of mental and physical health deteriorating further, of life and thinking skills being eroded, and of prisoners being introduced to drugs. Byaggravating the factors associated with re-offending, prison sentences can prove counter-productive as a contribution to crime reduction and public safety.

3 .. ••::• • ..• .•. " .' " " ..'•• ••.• c• .••.... .•.• •.• .:;. .

There is increasing evidence of what works in tackling the problems of offenders, and in reducing re offending. The following are some examples of the good practice that the SEU has identified during its visits and consultation:

offending behaviour can reduce reconviction rates by up to 14 per cent. They aim to change the way offenders think, to bring home the effect of their behaviour on themselvesand others, and to teach positive techniques to avoid the situations that lead to offending;

the RAPT Alcohol and Drug Addiction RecoveryProject has shown that of the two-thirds of prisoners who complete its programme, reconviction rates are 11 per cent lower than would normally be expected;

at HMP Norwich, the Anglia Care Trust negotiated with landlords to help prisoners retain or terminate their tenancies. They advised prisoners on finance and debt management issues during and after their sentence. More than 50 per cent of prisoners retained their tenancy with no added debt and only 5 per cent left prison with nowhere to go;

at HMP Belmarsh, the Mental Health LiaisonTeam has attained NHS status through offering in-patient assessment and support to those experiencing mental health problems and/or awaiting transfer to NHS hospitals. It also manages an effective outpatient referral process, ensuring that prisoners' needs are prepared for and information is passed on to the appropriate Community Mental Health Team;

at HMP Hull, a prison officer seconded to the local authority directly matches prisoners to available jobs in the community. The officer divides his time between working in prison and outside. There is no set liniit on the officer's contact time with ex-prisoners. He acts as an advocate, providing advice, support and encouragement. The project has a good record in finding employment for ex-prisoners;

at HMP Holme House, the Prisoner Passportscheme involves Jobcentre Plusstaff providing one-to-one advice on benefits. On release, prisoners are given a 'passport', which sets out the details of a pre arranged appointment with a Jobcentre Plusadviser in the community;

at HMP Reading, the Lattice Foundation train young offenders in forklift truck driving. Participants attend a day-release course, leading to a nationally accredited qualification. Over 70 per cent of participants have found employment on release, and only around 6 per cent are known to have re-offended. The scheme has been further developed to include training as groundwork engineers for the gas industry; and .

at HMP Leeds, the education department has adapted existing courses to deliver basic and key skills qualifications. Despite an annual turnover of 6,000 prisoners and an average stay of only 12 weeks, all prisoners receive targeted education and training, including testing for dyslexia.

These examples show that prison sentences can provide a real opportunity for constructive work. And it is clear from the profile of the prison population, that a sentence can be the first time many have been in sustained contact with public services. In many cases, the task is not to resettle prisoners in society, but settle them for the first time. There is a growing consensus that we are sending some people to prison who should not be there. Short prison sentences are not appropriate for all the offenders who currently receive them; and too many people with severe mental illnessare in prison rather than secure treatment facilities. All of this contributes to the problem of overcrowding, which in turn limitsthe capacity of prisons, probation and other services to work effectively to reduce re-offending.

Although the Prison Serviceand Probation Service have improved their focus on reducing re-offending, the current balance of resources still does not enable them to deliver beneficial programmes such as education, drug and mental health treatment, offending behaviour, and reparation programmes and many others, to anything likethe number who need them.

The availability of positive initiatives, such as those noted above, is patchy, and the majority of prisoners, particularly those serving short sentences, receive little practical support, before release or afterwards. For instance, only 50 per cent of prisons holding medium-risk prisoners have a drug treatment programme; the money invested in education per prisoner varies between comparable prisons from £200 to £2,000 per year. The result can often be a piecemeal, untailored response, based on what happens to be available in that particular prison or area, rather than what the prisoner needs to tackle his or her offending behaviour.

In addressing the factors that contribute to re-offending, correctional services often have to remedy a lifetime of combined service failure, often unaided. And when prisoners are released, agencies are far from pro-active in identifying them, and indeed there is evidence that prisoners are actively de-prioritised. Many experience real obstacles to re-engaging in learning or drug programmes on release; but these pale into insignificance compared with their difficulties in accessing housing and benefits.

No one is ultimately responsible for the rehabilitation process at any level from national policy, to the level of the individual prisoner. Responsibility and accountability for outcomes can be very unclear. The problems in prisoners' lives are often highly complicated and inter-related. They require a co-ordinated multi-agency response, within prison, across the crucial transitions between community and custody, and sustained long after release. Without this, they are likely to fall into thegaps between services. This task is made more complex by the need to assess the risk posed by released prisoners to public safety, and in some cases, to manage any potential threat across a number of areas, including housing and employment. However, joint-working mechanisms are not robust, and are not backed by shared targets, leverage, or up-to-date management information.

For those workers involved in the prison or in the community, the opportunities and rewards for innovation in rehabilitation work are currently far too limited.

In prisons, processes on reception and release could be much better desiqned to promote rehabilitation and to identify and tackle factors influencing re-offending. Prisoners are losing housing and employment, and accruing debt for want of basic procedures, dedicated resource and expertise. Good practice is not well enough articulated, and the process needs more resource and management priority.

For those who do increase their employability, the requirement to disclose their convictions to a potential employer can be a significant barrier, resulting in discrimination. The current arrangements do not get the balance right between the need to protect the public and the importance of enabling those who do not pose a significant risk of harm to move into legitimate employment. Short-term prisoners - those sentenced to less than 12 months - aged over 21 are not required to be supervised by the Probation Service. As a result, they are released in a completely unmanaged fashion, nothing is done with them on release, and indeed because there is no responsible agency to which they are handed over, very little is done in preparation for release. Yetshort-term prisoners have the highest re-offending rates. .

Not enough has been done te engage prisoners, their families, victims, communities, and voluntary and business sectors in rehabilitation.

The system is not always geared up to deal with the different factors affecting the re-offending of certain of prisoners, particularly women, young adults, black and minority ethnic groups, and remand prisoners. The challenges presented by juvenile prisoners are distinct, and the Government has recognised this by putting in place a separate tailored system for them. Each of these groups is discussed in detail in the report's annexes.

".:.: . • • -

To build a system that can reduce the level of re-offending is a major challenge. One key element is a transparent and robust sentencing framework, geared towards crime reduction. The Government is at present considering this, in the light of the Reviewof Sentencing published last year. If implemented, the Custody Plus proposal would ensure that short-term sentences contain a period both in custody and under community supervision.

But reform of sentences would not, of itself, be enough. Major changes to the way in which those inside and outside the criminal justice system operate are necessary to ensure that the system is focusing resources sufficiently to deal with the right people, using robust systems of accountability and joint working, and delivering in innovative ways. Long-term change is needed to ensure that all those dealing with prisoners and ex-prisoners make the maximum possible impact on re-offending.

The benefits of reform would not only be felt by the criminal justice system. There are likely to be multiple returns to services dealing with employment, housing, benefits,families, health and education.

The changes that the SEU recommends are significant and would require considerable further development, both by criminal justice agencies and other mainstream agencies. The rate at which change could be implemented would be dependent on the speed at which the detail could worked up and the rate at which resources could be identified and refocused across Government. As soon as possible, the Government should publish full details of how it proposes to respond to the SEU's report, together with a tlmetablefor delivery.

This summary is available in the following languages: Bengali, Gujarati, Cantonese, Hindi, Urdu and Punjabi, from the address below. They can also be downloaded from the SEU website: www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk

Braille and audio tape versions of the summary are also available.

The full report and further copies of this summary are available from the website, or from the address below.

Contact:

Marina Q'Neill Social Exclusion Unit 35 Great Smith Street London SW1P 3BQ

Tel: 020 72762072 Email: [email protected] .gov.uk